Well said, Cory! (01)
To amplify on your closing paragraph, in the context of "existing (ontology)
technologies are not sufficient... (02)
> In addition to the technologies there are interesting
> problems in terms of the social and political aspects of maintaining
> that shared concept base and the relationship between shared
> concepts in different communities. (03)
There are many other obstacles in addition to ontology tool deficiences that
inhibit interoperability. (04)
For example, the difficulties of funding infrastructural improvements (such as
an enterprise-wide SOA service bus) in light of the FEA PRM's stovepipe focus
on direct utility to end-users (houses, not roads; services not
infrastructures). (05)
And there's also the non-technical obstacles, such as the failure of the
intelligence "community" to share information that might have prevented 911.
Technical and budgetary obstalces contributed, but the fundamental problem was
stovepiped unwillingness to share in the absence of a perceived benefit. (06)
In other words, interoperability is a chain with many weak lengths. Ontology
tools are one of them, but not always the weakest. (07)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/cuo-wg/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/cuo-wg/
To Post: mailto:cuo-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://colab.cim3.net/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/cuo-wg/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/CommonUpperOntologyWG (08)
|