add pattern-definition

Signed-off-by: Rieks <[email protected]>

docs/terms/patterns/pattern-definition.md

@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+---
+# Docusaurus header
+id: definition
+displayed_sidebar: tev2SideBar
+# TEv2 Curated Text Header
+term: definition
+termType: pattern
+glossaryTerm: "Definition Pattern"
+glossaryText: "a [mental model](@) that describes the relations between a [concept](@) (or any other [semantic unit](@)), the [term(s)](@) that are used to refer to it, and the criteria to use for determining whether or not something is an instance (example) of that [semantic unit](@)."
+grouptags: [ ]
+formPhrases: [ "definition{ss}-pattern{ss}" ]
+# Curation status
+status: proposed
+created: 20240316
+updated: 20240316
+# Origins/Acknowledgements
+contributors: RieksJ
+attribution: "[TNO Terminology Design](https://tno-terminology-design.github.io/tev2-specifications/docs)"
+originalLicense: "[CC BY-SA 4.0](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/?ref=chooser-v1)"
+---
+
+# Definition Pattern
+
+import useBaseUrl from '@docusaurus/useBaseUrl'
+
+This [mental model](@) describes the relations between a [concept](@) (or any other [semantic unit](@)), the [term(s)](@) that are used to refer to it, and the criteria to use for determining whether or not something is an instance (example) of that [semantic unit](@).
+
+## Purpose
+
+The purpose of this [mental model](@) is to provide a solid basis for 
+
+- mechanisms that enable people to understand others;
+- authoring texts that use [terms](@) whose [definitions](@) have a high likelihood of being understandable by the intended audience of the text;
+- developing [terminologies](@) that can be used within a group of people.
+
+## Introduction
+
+Cognitive science has it that people have their individual ideas, concepts, etc. for making sense of the world around them. These things, that are called "[semantic units](@)" in cognitive science, are intangible. They are part of one's mind, and cannot readily be communicated to others.
+
+People have created representations of such [semantic units](@) that are tangible, and therefor can be used in communications. [Words](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word) or [phrases](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrase) are one example, but people also came to use [symbols](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol), [signs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_(semiotics)), sounds etc.
+
+The problem here is that there typically is no guarantee that people use such representations to refer to the same [semantic units](@). The result is that words or phrases may be [ambiguous](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguity), or [conflated](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflation).
+
+Fortunately, all of us have learned 'the meaning' of a large number of words and phrases, that is: what they mean in the social, cultural, national context in which we have grown up. They are the basic words of our [mother tongue](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_language). The context in which we grew up ensured that the people therein understand these basic words in the same way, that is: for all practical purposes.
+
+This is the basis on top of which we can introduce new terms, and describe [concepts](semantic-units@) that are new, or that are particular specializations of other [concepts](semantic-units@). Such descriptions should enable others that are to understand these [concepts](semantic-units@). Ideally, they are criteria that enable others to determine what is, and what is not, an instance (or: example) of the [concept](semantic-unit@). 
+
+Such criteria can be tested for validity:
+
+1. Devise an arbitrary use-cases in which people can  apply the criteria to something.
+2. Have all participants determine whether or not this something complies with the criteria.
+3. If there are participants that have a different judgment, they have a different understanding. To fix this may require adjustment of the criteria
+4. The more use-cases are devised in which people have the same judgments, the greater the likelihood that they have the same understanding of the [concept](semantic-unit@) that is being described.
+
+## Formalized model
+Here is a visual representation of this pattern, using the following **[notations and conventions](/docs/miscellaneous/notations-and-conventions#pattern-diagram-notations)**:
+
+<img
+  alt="Conceptual model of the 'definition' pattern"
+  src={useBaseUrl('images/tev2-definition.png')}
+/>
+
+The figure shows [semantic units](@), using a cloud-like symbol to illustrate that this is something intangible. It also shows that the [semantic unit](@) is part of a [scope](@), which typically contains several (i.e., a lot) of them.
+
+Within the context of its [scope](@), every [semantic unit](@):
+
+- can have at most one determinant, i.e., a criterion (a description) that can be used to determine whether or not something is an instance (or: example) of that [semantic-unit](@).
+- can be represented by any number of [words or phrases (terms)](term@), which are synonyms (or aliases) of each other.
+- can have at most one [definition](@), which is the composition of all [terms](scoped-term@) that are used to refer to the [semantic unit](@), and the (single) criterion that is its determinant.
+
+Thus, a [definition](@) only exists for a [semantic unit](@) in a [scope](@) if the determinant exists, and there is at least one [term](@) that is used within that [scope](@) to refer to it.

docs/terms/patterns/pattern-terminology.md

@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ Every [terminology](@) is scoped, i.e. part of a [scope](@). This [scope](@) con
 
 The central [concept](@) in this part is the [curated text](@), as it [documents](/docs/specs/files/curated-text-file) a specific [semantic unit](@), provides its [definition](@) (when appropriate), and specifies the [scoped term](@) that represents such [semantic unit](@) as well as its [synonyms](@). It also contains various other data, e.g. the [term type](@) (which is also the type of the [semantic unit](@)),  the list of [grouptags](@) that identify the groups of [semantic units](@) to which (the [semantic unit](@) that) it (documents,) belongs, etc. Basically, *any* changes to documentation or attributes related to a particular [semantic unit](@) are done in its [curated text](@).
 
-Another important [concept](@) is the [MRG entry](@), i.e. a [(machine readable) representation](http://localhost:3000/docs/specs/files/mrg#entries) of the meta data of a [semantic unit](@) that it refers to. Note that this [semantic unit](@) need not reside in the [knowledge](@essif-lab) of the [community](@) that owns the [scope](@) (in which case it would mainly consists of the header data of the [curated text](@) that documents the [semantic unit](@)), but can also reside in another [knowledge](@essif-lab) (in which case it would be a copy of an [MRG entry](@) in an [MRG](@) of a [scope](@) that documents that [semantic unit](@)).
+Another important [concept](@) is the [MRG entry](@), i.e. a [(machine readable) representation](/docs/specs/files/mrg#entries) of the meta data of a [semantic unit](@) that it refers to. Note that this [semantic unit](@) need not reside in the [knowledge](@essif-lab) of the [community](@) that owns the [scope](@) (in which case it would mainly consists of the header data of the [curated text](@) that documents the [semantic unit](@)), but can also reside in another [knowledge](@essif-lab) (in which case it would be a copy of an [MRG entry](@) in an [MRG](@) of a [scope](@) that documents that [semantic unit](@)).
 
 The [MRG](@) for a specific [terminology](@) of the [scope](@) is a [structure](/docs/specs/files/mrg#structure) that consists of some meta-data followed by a set of such [MRG entries](@) (with some meta data added). Within a [scope](@), multiple [terminologies](@) (and hence also multiple [MRGs](@)) can exist, e.g., which are distinguished between by their [version tags](@).
 

docs/terms/scope.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ term: scope
 termType: concept
 isa:
 glossaryTerm:
-glossaryText: "the extent of the [terms](@), [definitions](@) and other documentation that a [community](@) (which we call the [owner](@essif-lab) of the [scope](@)) needs to express, communicate and validate its [knowledge](@essif-lab) as relevant to achieving a specific subset of its [objectives](@essif-lab)."
+glossaryText: "the extent of the [terms](@), [definitions](@) and other documentation that a [community](@) (or [party](@), which we call the [owner](@essif-lab) of the [scope](@)) needs to express, communicate and validate its [knowledge](@essif-lab) as relevant to achieving a specific subset of its [objectives](@essif-lab)."
 grouptags: [ ]
 formPhrases: [ "scope{ss}", "scope-context{ss}" ]
 # Curation status
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ originalLicense: "[CC BY-SA 4.0](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/?
 # Scope
 
 ### Summary
-A **scope** is the extent of the [terms](@), [definitions](@) and other documentation that a [community](@) (which we call the [owner](@essif-lab) of the [scope](@)) needs to express, communicate and validate its [knowledge](@essif-lab) as relevant to achieving a specific subset of its [objectives](@essif-lab).
+A **scope** is the extent of the [terms](@), [definitions](@) and other documentation that a [community](@) (or [party](@), which we call the [owner](@essif-lab) of the [scope](@)) needs to express, communicate and validate its [knowledge](@essif-lab) as relevant to achieving a specific subset of its [objectives](@essif-lab).
 
 Other documentation includes [curated texts](@), and artifacts that are generated from that, such as [glossaries](@), [dictionaries](@) and the like. It also includes [tags](@) that can be used e.g. to refer to other [scopes](@) ([scopetags](@)), identify different versions for artifacts ([versiontags](@)), or create particular groups of [terms](@) ([grouptags](@)).
 

docs/terms/term.md

@@ -7,7 +7,11 @@ term: term
 termType: concept
 isa: identifier
 glossaryTerm:
-glossaryText: "a word or phrase (i.e.: text) that is used to represent (identify) a specific [semantic unit](@) (in some [scope](@))."
+glossaryText: "a word or phrase (i.e.: text) that is used to represent [concepts](semantic-unit@)."
+glossaryNotes:
+- "a term is ambiguous if it represents more than one [concept](semantic-unit@)."
+- "a term that is used in a particular [scope](@) (which we call a [scoped term](@)) should not be ambiguous."
+- "a term that is unambiguous can be made part of a [definition](@) by associating it with a criterion that people can use to determine what is, and what is not, an instance (or: example) of that term."
 grouptags: [ ]
 formPhrases: [ "term{ss}", "word{ss}", "phrase{ss}" ]
 # Curation status