The case for classes and instances - a response to representing instances: the case for reengineering conceptual modelling grammars

ABSTRACT In “Representing instances: The case for reengineering conceptual modelling grammars”, Lukyanenko et al. (2019) argue that conceptual modelling has been biased towards a focus on knowledge about general phenomena (classes) rather than about specific instances. While we agree that more attention needs to be paid to instances, we critically reflect on their underlying assumptions about instances and classes. Lukyanenko et al. (2019) assume that instances are mainly material things, and also assume that class-based modelling typically requires that class definitions include comprehensive attribute structures that are expected to be stable over time. Based on these assumptions, they conclude that classes are not needed for modelling instances. As an alternative to these assumptions, we suggest that instances can be viewed as language constructs, i.e., as objects that may be anything that is uniquely referred to and identified in human communication. Based on this assumption, we introduce an identity-oriented view of classes, implying that classes are required for modelling objects (instances). We agree with Lukyanenko et al. (2019) that a reengineering of conceptual modelling grammars is required. This reengineering would benefit from approaches such as an identity-oriented view of classes and a class-instance modelling grammar.

[1]  Instance , 2020, Definitions.

[2]  Roman Lukyanenko,et al.  Representing instances: the case for reengineering conceptual modelling grammars , 2018, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[3]  Concepts , 2019, Handbook on Gender and Violence.

[4]  Paul Johannesson,et al.  Institutional ontology for conceptual modeling , 2018, J. Inf. Technol..

[5]  Paul Beynon-Davies Form-ing governance , 2015 .

[6]  Pär J. Ågerfalk,et al.  On the Need for Identity in Ontology-Based Conceptual Modelling , 2015, APCCM.

[7]  Otávio Bueno,et al.  Why identity is fundamental , 2014 .

[8]  John S. Wilkins,et al.  Nature and Classification , 2014 .

[9]  U. Michigan,et al.  THE [O iii] NEBULA OF THE MERGER REMNANT NGC 7252: A LIKELY FAINT IONIZATION ECHO , 2013, 1307.2233.

[10]  Pär J. Ågerfalk,et al.  Ptolemaic Metamodelling?: The Need for a Paradigm Shift , 2013 .

[11]  J. Wilkins,et al.  The nature of classification : relationships and kinds in the natural sciences , 2013 .

[12]  Jay Foster Ontologies without Metaphysics: Latour, Harman and the Philosophy of Things , 2011 .

[13]  Pär J. Ågerfalk,et al.  The Stolen Identifier: an Inquiry into the Nature of Identification and the Ontological Status of Information Systems , 2011, ICIS.

[14]  C. Lintott,et al.  Galaxy Zoo Green Peas: discovery of a class of compact extremely star-forming galaxies , 2009, 0907.4155.

[15]  C. Brown Aquinas and the Ship of Theseus: Solving Puzzles about Material Objects , 2005 .

[16]  M. Bunge Emergence and Convergence: Qualitative Novelty and the Unity of Knowledge , 2003 .

[17]  Veda C. Storey,et al.  An ontological analysis of the relationship construct in conceptual modeling , 1999, TODS.

[18]  Andy S. Evans,et al.  Reasoning with UML class diagrams , 1998, Proceedings. 2nd IEEE Workshop on Industrial Strength Formal Specification Techniques.

[19]  Yair Wand,et al.  Choosing classes in conceptual modeling , 1997, CACM.

[20]  Alan Sidelle Identity and the Identity-like , 1992 .

[21]  M. Bunge Treatise on basic philosophy , 1974 .

[22]  M. Dummett Frege: Philosophy of Language , 1973 .

[23]  A. Koller,et al.  Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language , 1969 .

[24]  J. Stevenson United States Courts , 1966, American Journal of International Law.

[25]  T. Abel,et al.  Mind, Self, and Society , 1934 .