Re: [regrep-semantic] PR5: Individual as a new canonical objectType

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Evan,

I like your suggest here.

Thanks, DW.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
To: <david@drrw.info>
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 5:32 PM
Subject: Re: [regrep-semantic] PR5: Individual as a new canonical objectType


>
> Earlier in the week David Webber wrote regarding a term used in
> one of my proposed requirements:
> >Totally!
> >
> >What madness is this?!?
> >
> >Instance it is then - or maybe Individual Instance - but
> >not Individual!!.
>
> I don't have a strong feelings about the terms that we use to
> name these elements (Individual and Property) in the RIM.
> Whatever terms we choose though need to:
> 1) be clearly distinguishable from similar objects elsewhere in the RIM,
and
> 2) have text clearly explaining what they correspond to in the
> Knowledge Representation languages from which they were taken.
>
> -Evan
>