Dear Dagobert, (01)
Sounds like we are close. Just one point. (02)
> Note: It is not necessary to start from all upper
> ontologies. Starting from a few upper ontologies that are especially
> important to the purpose at hand would lead to a first iteration
> superstructure that could then be expanded by incrementally adding
> other ontologies as the need arises. (03)
This sound like you think the current upper ontologies have somewhat different
scopes. The problem I see is that they have much the same scope, and I see
the first task as mapping between and understanding the core concepts in the
first 3 or so levels of specialisation of the various ontologies. (04)
Very early on you will hit a problem of 3D vs 4D which are different
(contradictory) at the highest levels. (05)
Regards (06)
Matthew West
Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom (07)
Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
Internet: http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/ (08)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> Dagobert Soergel
> Sent: 11 October 2005 05:15
> To: ONTAC-WG General Discussion
> Subject: RE: [ontac-forum] Upper ontology / common semantic model
>
>
> See responses below.
>
> DS
>
> At 10/10/2005 04:20 AM, you wrote:
> >Dear Dagobert,
> >
> >See below.
> >
> >
> >Regards
> >
> >Matthew West
> >Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
> >Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
> >Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
> >
> >Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
> >Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
> >Internet: http://www.shell.com
> >http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> > > Dagobert Soergel
> > > Sent: 09 October 2005 20:19
> > > To: ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: [ontac-forum] Upper ontology / common semantic model
> > >
> > >
> > > I am separating out this part of the thread.
> > > I apologize if some of this is obvious. It is often "hard to
> > > understand what is understood".
> > >
> > > This is a suggested plan of work for the upper ontology subgroup
> > >
> > > 1 Collect suggested upper ontologies
>
>
>
> > >
> > > 2 Compare and determine differences
> > > 2.1 In elements (presence / absence and, more
> difficult,
> > > definition)
> > > 2.2 in relationships
> >
> >MW: It is very easy for this to become sterile if it is not
> grounded in
> >doing something practical, so I would suggest mapping some
> limited set of
> >lower level concepts into each of them would be a better way
> to discover
> >the similarities/differences - which may be as much in the
> approach to
> >analysis as the concepts contained.
>
> This is not inconsistent with what I suggested
>
> > >
> > > 3 Try to resolve differences, creating a superstructure
> > > that incorporates
> > > the non-contradictory parts of various schemes
> >
> >MW: This would doom the exercise to failure. People whose treasured
> >ontologies were marginalised would leave rather than see what they
> >had done "wrecked". It was trying to do this that largely
> stopped progress
> >in the SUO WG effort (IMHO).
> >
> >Of course, identifying concepts that were identical would be a useful
> >exercise in all this.
> >
> >Rather what I think is necessary is to identify what John
> Sowa would call
> >a "lattice of theories" so that contradictory as well as
> non-contradictory
> >elements can be included from upper ontologies. That way you
> keep people
> >on board, and perhaps we all learn something from the
> different perspectives,
> >and over time move more closely together. (I believe some
> collective learning
> >is a prerequisite for success).
>
> The "superstructure" would not replace the existing ontologies but
> provide a means for mapping. I think what I have in mind is the same
> as or very similar to Sowa's lattice. I believe that the process I
> outlined is a way to get there.
>
> Note: It is not necessary to start from all upper
> ontologies. Starting from a few upper ontologies that are especially
> important to the purpose at hand would lead to a first iteration
> superstructure that could then be expanded by incrementally adding
> other ontologies as the need arises.
>
>
>
> > > 3.1 By adding elements
> > > 3.2 By adding relationships
> > >
> > > 4 Articulate the remaining differences so that they
> are clearly
> > > understood
> > >
> > > In addition, the subgroup should deal with ontologies that can be
> > > reused in many contexts, such as an ontology of time concepts.
> > >
> > > My reworking of the WordNet top level (attached) may be
> > > useful in this context.
> > >
> > > DS
> > >
> > >
> > > Dagobert Soergel
> > > College of Information Studies
> > > University of Maryland
> > > 4105 Hornbake Library
> > > College Park, MD 20742-4345
> > > Office: 301-405-2037 Home: 703-823-2840 Mobile:
> > > 703-585-2840
> > > OFax: 301-314-9145 HFax: 703-823-6427
> > > dsoergel@xxxxxxx www.dsoergel.com
> > >
> >
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
> >To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
> >http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
> >Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
> >Community Wiki:
> >http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyC
oordinatingWG (09)
Dagobert Soergel
College of Information Studies
University of Maryland
4105 Hornbake Library
College Park, MD 20742-4345
Office: 301-405-2037 Home: 703-823-2840 Mobile: 703-585-2840
OFax: 301-314-9145 HFax: 703-823-6427
dsoergel@xxxxxxx www.dsoergel.com (010)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG (011)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG (012)
|