The Ontology of Documents Barry Smith http ontologist

The Ontology of Documents Barry Smith http: //ontologist. com 1

PART ONE: Beyond Information Objects PART TWO: What Documents Wreak PART THREE: What you can Wreak with Documents PART FOUR: Standardized Documents http: //ontologist. com 2

PART ONE Beyond information objects http: //ontologist. com 3

Much valuable work on ‘documents’ in the context of XML, etc. , standardization e. g. Bob Glushko: “A document is a purposeful and selfcontained collection of information. ” • focuses on information content, not on the physical container • sees business collaborations – e. g. between on-line customer credit card authorization service when the latter verifies and charges the customer’s account – as ‘Internet information exchanges’ • but there is more than information here http: //ontologist. com 4

(Much bad stuff too) HL 7 Clinical Document Architecture • is an XML-based document markup standard that specifies the structure and semantics of clinical documents for the purpose of information exchange • all CDA documents derive their meaning from the HL 7 Reference Information Model (RIM) http: //ontologist. com 5

HL 7 -RIM Document: Definition: Specialization of Act to add the characteristics unique to document management services. (3. 7. 1) Act: Definition: An Act is an action of interest that has happened, can happen, is happening, is intended to happen, or is requested/demanded to happen. (1. 5. 1) Act: Definition: A record of something that is being done, has been done, can be done, or is intended or requested to be done. (3. 1. 1) http: //ontologist. com 6

HL 7 -RIM (Ballot September 2004) Logical nonsense Act = record of an Act (1. 5. 1) Act = intentional action (3. 1. 1) Ontological nonsense “there is no distinction between an activity and its documentation” (3. 1. 1) Sheer nonsense document is a subclass (? !) of structured document (2. 2. 3) (Compare: number is a special type of prime number) http: //ontologist. com 7

HL 7 -RIM • draws no clear distinctions between – documents (as entities which endure, can be stored, etc. ) – those acts of recording information which create documents – acts of ordering or requesting or signing documents – the information recorded in documents – the activities described in documents etc. http: //ontologist. com 8

We are interested here in the class of (roughly: time-sensitive) documents of importance e. g. • in homeland security (identification documents) • in commerce • in law • in healthcare Thus: not novels. . . http: //ontologist. com 9

Some examples Made of paper novel license textbook newspaper advertising flier recipe map business card degree certificate clay tablet recording outcome of litigation advertising hoarding deed e-document gravestone contract electronic health record hallmarked silver plate will receipt statement of accounts medical consent form http: //ontologist. com Not made of paper movie clapper credit card receipt stock market ticker film credits exterior signage on buildings car license plate 10

OED 1. , 2. Teaching, lesson learned (cf. doctor, docile, docent) 3. That which serves to show, point out, or prove something; evidence, proof. 4. Something written, inscribed, etc. , which furnishes evidence or information upon any subject, as a manuscript, title-deed, tomb-stone, coin, picture, etc. http: //ontologist. com 11

What is missing from existing document ontologies: • the social and institutional (deontic, quasi-legal) powers of documents • the social interactions in which documents play an essential role (how documents bind people together) • the sorts of things which we can do with documents • the different types of institutional systems to which documents belong • the provenance of documents (on what distinguishes original, authentic documents from copies, forgeries. . . ) http: //ontologist. com 12

What is missing from existing document ontologies: – document as stand-alone entity vs. document with all its different types of proximate and remote attachments – document template vs. filled-in document – document vs. the piece of paper (or other physical carrier) upon which a document is written/printed, – etc. Focusing on information alone will not suffice; it is a hard problem to simulate some of these features in the case of documents which exist only in a digital medium http: //ontologist. com 13

Allographic vs. Autographic • A work of art is “autographic if and only if the distinction between the original and the copy has meaning; or rather, if even its most exact reproduction does not have the status of authenticity. ” (Nelson Goodman, Languages of Art) • painting is autographic • music is allographic • It follows that a musical forgery is ontologically impossible (R. Pouivet, “The ontology of forgery”) • How simulate the autographic in a digital medium? Not via any pure information object, but only via provenance (history). http: //ontologist. com 14

Allographic = identity is notational vs. Autographic = identity is historical • A signature is autographic • A fingerprint left at the scene of the crime is autographic • A fingerprint taken for identification purposes is allographic http: //ontologist. com 15

PART TWO What documents wreak http: //ontologist. com 16

Two types of ontology • natural-science ontology (bio-ontologies) • administrative ontology (e-commerce ontologies) Healthcare ontologies span the two http: //ontologist. com 17

Documents belong to the domain of administrative entities such as organizations, rules, prices, debts, standardized transactions . . . , which we ourselves create But what does ‘create’ mean ? http: //ontologist. com 18

Austin/Searle Speech Act Theory 1. We tell people how things are (assertives) 2. We try to get them to do things (directives) 3. We commit ourselves to doing things (commissives) 4. We express our feelings and attitudes (expressives) 5. We bring about changes in the world through utterances (declarations) (“I name this ship. . . ”) http: //ontologist. com 19

The Searle thesis claims and obligations and deontic powers* are brought into existence by the performance of speech acts (acts of promising, marrying, accusing. . . ) The Construction of Social Reality (1989) * rights, relations of authority, debts, property-relations, permissions, . . . http: //ontologist. com 20

HL 7 -RIM claims to be based on speech act theory, but ignores completely the deontic features of speech acts http: //ontologist. com 21

appointings, marryings, promisings. . . change the world but only if certain background conditions are satisfied: valid formulation legitimate authority acceptance by addressees We perform a speech act. . . the world changes, instantaneously http: //ontologist. com 22

A new entity comes into being – a claim, obligation, right, power, name, office – which survives for an extended period of time What is the physical basis for this extended existence? In small societies: the memories of those involved In large societies: documents Writing creates and sustains permanent, re-usable meaning and permanent re-usable deontic powers http: //ontologist. com 23

Differences between document acts and speech acts • you don’t need to understand a document in order to perform a properly constituted document act • paper documents are continuants, which means that they can change over time (be filled in, copied, stamped, etc. ) • they can also create traceable liability (form an audit trial) • they can be attached together, creating new document -complexes whose structure mirrors relations (e. g. of debtor to creditor) among humans http: //ontologist. com 24

Differences between document acts and speech acts • document acts typically involve components deriving from several of Searle’s five types – dual role of a delivery note: • to guide those involved in delivering an object • to allow the recipient to attest to its receipt • and also components of other types –dual role of your signature in your passport: • to attest to the truth of a certain assertion • to provide a sample pattern for comparison http: //ontologist. com 25

Differences between document acts and speech acts • speech acts are normally self-validating (they wear their provenance on their face) • documents need technological devices (official stamps, special watermarks, signatures, countersignatures, seals, . . . ) http: //ontologist. com 26

http: //ontologist. com 27

Countersignatures http: //ontologist. com 28

The Searle thesis: claims and obligations and deontic powers are brought into existence by the performance of speech acts http: //ontologist. com 29

The de Soto thesis: documents and document systems are mechanisms for creating the institutional orders of modern societies Hernando de Soto, The Mystery of Capital, New York: Basic Books, 2000 http: //ontologist. com 30

The creative powers of documents stock and share certificates create capital examination documents create Ph. Ds title deed/cadastral map creates real estate parcels marriage licenses create bonds of matrimony bankruptcy certificates create bankrupts statutes of incorporation create companies title deeds create property rights and property owners http: //ontologist. com 31

The creative powers of documents insurance certificates create insurance coverage price tag/pricelist (creates commitments) patent (creates rights) license/degree certificate (creates rights) statement of accounts (creates obligations) membership card (creates rights) divorce decree (creates rights and obligations) http: //ontologist. com 32

Identity documents • create identity • and thereby create the possibility of identity theft • what is the ontology of identity? • what is the epistemology of identity (the technologies of identification)? http: //ontologist. com 33

The creative power of documents create authorities (physicians’ license creates physician) authorities create documents (physician creates sick note) Documents issued by an authority within the framework of a valid legal institution vs. issued by an authority extralegally on its own behalf (cf. US Declaration of Independence) http: //ontologist. com 34

Organizational chart a map of the organization and of its flows of authority (a system of positional roles in the document represents [creates? ] the system of positional roles which is the organization) http: //ontologist. com 35

Homework: How classify these kinds of documents partnership agreement/ statute of incorporation proxy form/representation agreement ballot form residence permit census report stock certificate insurance claim form insurance policy visa/immigration document bankruptcy certificate http: //ontologist. com insurance card/health insurance card health certificate consent form (for medical procedure) medical record criminal record pension book rent book accident report/theft report/police report/charge architects plan (vs. template for an architects plan) 36

What kinds of documents have creative power in social reality? not novels – which exist in many identical copies (tokens of the same type) not watercolors in a gallery – which do not contain time-sensitive information http: //ontologist. com 37

AUTOGRAPHIC ALLOGRAPHIC • Non-Creative • novel • textbook • newspaper • recipe painting • statue map building • business card http: //ontologist. com Creative advertizing flier timetable guarantee tax form (filled in) minutes of a meeting license birth certificate degree certificate deed contract will receipt banknote 38

PART THREE What you can wreak with documents http: //ontologist. com 39

What you can do with a document [DOCUMENT ACTS] Sign it Stamp it Witness it Fill it in Revise it Nullify it Realize (interrupt, abort. . . ) actions mandated by it Deliver it (de facto, de jure) Declare it active/inactive Display it (price list) Register it Archive it http: //ontologist. com 40

Addressees (documents point also forward in time) Each kind of document has an associated kind of public 1. the creators of the document-template (legislators, drafters. . . ) 2. the guardians of the document (solicitors, notaries . . . ) 3. the fillers-in of the document (this is the central target audience) 4. the recipients of the document (registrars, . . . ) 5. the beneficiaries of the document (wills) http: //ontologist. com 41

Registration storing of documents in a way which makes them – permanently accessible (checkable, verifiable) – amendable (e. g. where property is used as collateral for loans) – combinable (attachment): social relations are created via cross-referenced and crossattached documents – more easily authenticated http: //ontologist. com 42

Redundancy • Safety procedures for mission-critical technology involve multiple layers of redundancy to ensure against catastrophe. • a photograph alone is not sufficient to establish your identity: it must appear in the right place in the right sort of document that has been marked in the right sort of way by signatures, countersignatures, stamps, ID numbers • these elements serve to anchor the document to the reality beyond and to the history of its production http: //ontologist. com 43

anchoring documents to reality http: //ontologist. com 44

Anchoring fingerprint official stamp photograph bar code, cow brand-mark car license plate allow cross-referencing to documents knowledge by acquaintance knowledge by description knowledge by comparison • I use my passport to prove my identity • You use my passport to check my identity http: //ontologist. com 45

The ontology of signatures documents needing signatures signed/not signed/incorrectly signed/ fraudulently signed/signed and stamped signed by proxy with a single/with a plurality of signatories http: //ontologist. com 46

The ontology of names • a baptism ceremony creates a new sort of cultural object called a name • names, too, belong to the domain of administrative (= created) entities • this is an abstract yet time-bound object, like a nation or a club • it is an object with parts (your first name and your last name are parts of your name, in something like the way in which the first movement and the last movement are parts of Beethoven’s 9 th Symphony) http: //ontologist. com 47

How do documents relate to their linguistically expressed content? • What extra features do they have (signing, counter-signing, registering, validating. . . ) which give them their deontic force? • And how do we recreate these features in the realm of e-documents? • How do we anchor e-documents to objects and processes in physical reality (e. g. to human beings)? http: //ontologist. com 48

How do documents relate to the underlying physical medium • A credit card receipt is autographic • A credit card is allographic • But the credit card as physical carrier is dispensable: – What is important are the credit card numbers http: //ontologist. com 49

The ontology of (credit card) numbers • These numbers are not mathematical (not informational) entities – they are ‘thick’ (historical) numbers, special sorts of cultural artefacts – they are information objects with provenance: abstract keys fitting into a globally distributed lock http: //ontologist. com 50

PART FOUR Standardized Documents http: //ontologist. com 51

Standardized documents Template, followed by act of filling in First step towards standardized products is a plan, a description, a template, which can be filled in (brand identity)) documents filled in completely/partially correctly/incorrectly validly/invalidly http: //ontologist. com 52

from the Shiprock Navajo fair New Mexico, September 30 -October 1, 2005 http: //ontologist. com 53

Standardized documents • allow networking • across time (documents can accumulate through attachment) • across space (different groups can orientate themselves around the same document forms) • can encapsulate the memory and experience of an entire profession http: //ontologist. com 54

Good documents vs. bad documents Good documents must be well-designed 1. they must map the corresponding reality in a perspicuous way – cf. maps as document 2. they must be easy to fill in by members of its central target audience (need for process of education? ) 3. they must not create new problems (should bow off the stage once they have been properly filled in and never be seen again except in those rare cases where problems arise) http: //ontologist. com 55

standardized documents • improve the flow of communications • allow standardized transactions • allow assets to be described using standard categories, so as to enable comparisons • allow the transition from ad hoc narratives (as in old title deeds) to structured representations of reality • communication is hereby advanced because signals are abbreviated • supports the creation of more effective registries http: //ontologist. com 56

• • • standardized documents embody social one can more easily check that one has filled in the boxes memory — correctly from a syntactical point of view — truthfully — by the right person — with the right authority some entries are made self-validating through the presence of official seals or stamps some entries refer to other forms (copies of which may be required to be attached to this form) the form itself can guarantee that it occupies its proper place in a network of forms facilitates checking and enforceability, and thus contributes to trust and to simplification of transactions and (cf. de Soto) makes us all better people http: //ontologist. com 57

END http: //ontologist. com 58