RE: [ontac-forum] Questions and thoughts on using a 11179 registry for o

["Warzel, Denise (NIH/NCI)" <warzeld@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Gary,

 

I’m not sure what the question was?  You said you wanted to know something about the top level concepts that categorize and organize the data elements…?

 

I don’t think that Frank meant that the ontology would be built up from data elements…I could be wrong but we have worked closely on this whole notion of linking concepts to data elements based on the NCI model…

 

The whole idea is NOT to define data elements in isolation …. And not to define the ontology from the data elements…but to use the ontology as the basis for the naming an defining the data elements…..

 

Does that help?

 

 

Denise

---

From: Gary Berg-Cross [mailto:gary.berg-cross@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 5:45 PM
To: ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ontac-forum] Questions and thoughts on using a 11179 registry for ontology registration

 

Denise ,

 

You mentioned the possible use of thence registry, based on ISO 11179 (data element definition) for ontologies. 

 

>Its partitioned into 'Contexts' so its conceivable that one could be set up for Ontology Working Group' project, if its a close enough fit...the idea of independently entering concepts and allowing them to be classified into multiple classification schemes is easily supported - with a few > additional business rules to support the ONTAC Context it might be an easy way to get going? 

 

This may be useful, but I’d like to know something about your top level concepts that categorize and organize the data elements.

I know that Frank Olken has discussed how ontologies can support ISO/IEC 11179 registries and listed the following reasons:

1. Ontologies can be used as a mechanism to link together (DB) schemas.
2. Ontologies can be used as a classification scheme to organize data element concepts, etc.
3. Ontologies are interesting objects to register in their own right.
4. If we can register ontologies in ISO/IEC 11179 registries we could avoid the creation of multiple types of metadata registries (one for data elements, etc. and another for ontologies).
5. Integration of ontology registration into ISO/IEC 11179 registries will facilitate maintenance of referential integrity constraints between data element concept definitions and domain specific ontologies.
6. Ontologies / axiom sets provide a possible common mechanism to encode a wide variety of integrity constraints concerning database schemas, etc.

The third item, registering ontologies, is just what you propose.

 

It has always seemed to me, however, that defining elements in relative isolation hides the really hard aspect of ontology as an integrated model.  Thus the approach of  building up an ontology  from data elements semantics may be deceptively simple for a while and then run into a steep incline. 

 

 

 

Gary Berg-Cross

EM&I

Enterprise Architecture and Onology

_________________________________________________________________
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    (01)