|From:||"Gary Berg-Cross" <gary.berg-cross@xxxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Tue, 22 Nov 2005 13:05:01 -0500|
Antifoundational stances in philosophy are not intuitve to many of us at first exposure,
but perhaps the analogy to Euclidean geometr and the parallel axiom provides an overly simple
bridge to see alternative foundations that provide useful theorems in different contexts
Or perhaps we need to adapt the antifoundational slogan of "having to build our boats while at sea" to
the ontological endeavor.
In response to your point:
upper level, such as DOLCE and many others (including
the one I presented in my KR book), is that there is only *one* upper level.
The DOLCE design patterns have been designed to propagate design decisions
JS>made for the
DOLCE upper level to every level of the ontology from top to
Yes, but DOLCE is the first module of the WonderWeb Foundational Ontologies Library
(WFOL).which, as I understand it from Guarino’s briefings, has no single upper level.
Instead it has a “small” set of foundational ontologies that have been “carefully”
justified and positioned with respect to a space of alternative, possible choices.
The approach is to clearly documented options using clear branching points
basic to allow exploration and easy comparison of alternative ontological options. That
seems to be a practical strategy for not getting caught in one upper level as a first step.
_________________________________________________________________ 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)
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||[ontac-forum] Mary McCaffery/DC/USEPA/US is out of the office., Mccaffery . Mary|
|Next by Date:||RE: [ontac-forum] Single upper ontology issue, Paul S Prueitt|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: [ontac-forum] RE: A suggestion for ontological discussions at ONTAC meetings., John F. Sowa|
|Next by Thread:||RE: [ontac-forum] Single upper ontology issue, Paul S Prueitt|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|