Existence Dependency and Information Structure

  • C. N. G. (Kit) Dampney
  • Janet Aisbett
Conference paper


The technologies providing connectivity, storage, communication bandwidths and graphics user interfacing continue to improve. Security and privacy are being comprehensively addressed. Middleware, integrated development environments, visual tools, and componentry enable more sophisticated applications and interconnectivity over diverse computing environments. This enables better data transfer capability. But what about information?


Unify Modelling Language Category Theory Object Type Terminal Object Unify Modelling Language Diagram 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aisbett, J. and G. Gibbon, 2001, A general formulation of conceptual spaces as a meso level representation, Artifrcial Intelligence, 133, 189–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barr, M and C. Wells, 1999, Category Theory for Computer Scientists,Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  3. Colomb, R. M. and R. Weber, 1998, Completeness and quality of an ontology for an information system, in: Formal Ontology in Information Systems (International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems, N. Guarino, ed., 10S-Press (Amsterdam, Oxford, Tokyo, Washington, DC ), pp. 207–217.Google Scholar
  4. Colomb, R. M, C. N. G. Dampney, and M. S. J. Johnson, 2001, Use of category-theoretic fibration as an abstraction mechanism in informationsystems, Acta Informatica, 38, 1–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dampney, C. N. G, 1987, Specifying a semantically adequate structure for information systems and databases, Proceedings of the 6th. International Conference on the Entity-Relationship Approach, New York, 143–164.Google Scholar
  6. Dampney, C. N. G., 1998, The event as a fundamental construct of information systems, Proceedings of Ninth Australasian Conference on Information Systems, University of New South Wales, Sydney, pp. 120–133.Google Scholar
  7. Dampney, C. N. G., M. S. J. Johnson, P. Dazeley and V. Reich, 1994, A higher order “commuting diagram” structure that supports very large information system data and process architecture, International Federation for Information Processing Transactions, North Holland, A54, pp. 211–222.Google Scholar
  8. Dampney, C. N. G. and M. S. J. Johnson, 1995. Application of consistent dependency to corporate and project information models. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, 1021, pp 445–446.Google Scholar
  9. Dampney, C. N. G., G. Pegler and M. S. J. Johnson, Harmonising Health Information Models - a critical analysis of current practice, Health Informatics Conference 2001 Proceedings. Google Scholar
  10. Davey, B. A. and H. A. Priestley, 2002, Introduction to Lattices and Order,(second edition), Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Elmasri and Navanthe, 1989, Database Systems,Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company Inc.Google Scholar
  12. Finkelstein, C., 1989, An Introduction to Information Engineering: From Strategic Planning to Information Systems,Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  13. Firesmith, D., B. Henderson-Sellers, and I. Graham, 1998, Open Modelling Language Reference Manual,Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Fowler, M., 1997, UML Distilled: applying the standard object modeling language,Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  15. Johnson, M. S. J. and C. N. G. Dampney, 1993, Category theory and information systems engineering, Proceedings ofAMAST93, University of Twente, pp. 95–103.Google Scholar
  16. Johnson, M. S. J. and C. N. G. Dampney, 1994, On the value of commutative diagrams in information modelling, Springer Workshops in Computing, Nivat et al, Springer, London. pp. 47–60.Google Scholar
  17. Johnson, M. and R. Rosebrugh, 2001, Update algorithms for the sketch data model, Proceedings of the Fifth Intemational Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, London, Ontario, 367–376.Google Scholar
  18. Katis, P., N, Sabadini and R. F. C. Walters, 1997a;b, Span (Graph): A categorical algebra of transition systems; Representing place/transition nets, in Span (Graph), Johnson, M. S. J., ed., pp. 307–321; pp 322–336.Google Scholar
  19. Milner, R., 1980, A Calculus of Communicating Systems, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 92, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  20. Miltsakaki, E., C. Creswell, K. Forbes, R. Prasad, A. Joshi and B. Webber, 2002, The discourse anaphoric properties of connectives, Proceedings of the 4th Discourse Anaphora and Anaphor Resolution Colloquium ( DAARC 2002 ), Lisbon.Google Scholar
  21. Raghuram, S., 1996, Knowledge creation in the telework context, International Journal of Technology Management, 11, 7 /8, 859–870.Google Scholar
  22. Rumbaugh, J., I Jacobson, and G. Booch, 1999, The Unified Modelling Language Reference Manual,Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  23. Searle, J., 1995, The Construction of Social Reality, New York, Free Press.Google Scholar
  24. Stefanik, R., 1994, Structuralism, Category Theory and Philosophy of Mathematics, Washington: MSG Press.Google Scholar
  25. Snoeck, M. and G. Dedene, 1998, Existence Dependency: The key to semantic integrity between structural and behavioural aspects of object types, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 24, 4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. van Fraasen, B. C., 2002, The Empiricist Stand,Yale University. (See also
  27. Weber, R., 1997, Ontological Foundations of Information Systems,Coopers & Lybrand Accounting Research Methodology Monograph No 4.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. N. G. (Kit) Dampney
  • Janet Aisbett
    • 1
  1. 1.University of NewcastleCallaghanAustralia

Personalised recommendations