[ontac-forum] RE: Shall we start? - sub (10)

["Cassidy, Patrick J." <pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx>]

ONTAC-WG

    The proposed starting set of concepts for the TopLevel ontology which could eventually serve as the core/UF/COSMO ontology is presented as an indented list (latest version) at:

               http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?CosmoWG/TopLevel2

 

There is a pointer on that page to the OWL version of the same ontology (at this point little more than a bare taxonomy).

 

This is a WIki and can be modified by anyone.  if you decide to modify the suggested structure, please let us know via the ONTAC list.

 

Hans Teijgeler has noted that links to concepts in the TopLevel other than to the SUMO concepts are missing:

 

[HT] I *did* tell you that the TopLevel was rather useless to me, because the links often end in an error Editing Denied!. I did send you an HTML file with a graph and OWL listing (with definition and example) of the top level of 15926, and suggested to you to ask the other "bloodgroups" to make theirs available without having to plough through manuals or listings.

 

The  documentation missing from the indented list is present in the OWL version.  Although Adam Pease has expended considerable effort to add links to the on-line SUMO documentation  in the indented list, no one (myself included) has created comparable links to other ontologies.  The Wiki page is free for editing, and I hope others will add in links if they feel they are useful.  I have been occupied with other urgent tasks lately and have not had time to put in those links myself.  An example of how to add links to other ontologies can be found in the entry for :

          Action(Cyc)/IntentionalProcess(SUMO)/action(DOLCE)/Activity(ISO 15926)

 

Any who are familiar with OpenCyc or DOLCE are encouraged  to add pointers to those ontologies.  The definitions (documentation) can be added to the pages:

   http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?CosmoWG/OpenCycDefinitions

or  http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?CosmoWG/DolceDefinitions

   and links from the indented hierarchy can be made to those definitions via the purple numbers (click on the purple number at the end of each definition to get a link)

 

Pointers to the links to the original on-line ontologies have been added to the TopLevel2 page.

 

For the OpenCyc, there is a Protege import of OpenCyc 0.7 in our References folder:

    http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/reference/ProtegeOntologies/

 

 . . . consisting of the three Protege text files.  This is a very incomplete import even of that older OpenCyc version, but the classes and many of the relations will be visible there, if one does not want to download the actual OpenCyc itself (freely available).

 

 

[HT]  Most of the entity types I see on your TopLevel seem to me very specialized and probably too low in their hierarchy.

 

Please feel free to add in any concepts (with documentation of the intended meaning, and pointers to the ontology from which they came, if any) if you think that they will be helpful at this stage in development of the COSMO.

 

As a general rule, I think that if there is a task that appears desirable, and **only one person** can do that task, it is appropriate to ask that person to put it on his/her agenda.  If there is a task that can be done by anyone (modifying a Wiki page), it would be good if anyone who thinks it will be useful would undertake to perform that task, so that we will have the benefit of the effort of the entire group, and bottlenecks will not develop due to the limited time available from any one participant.  Of course if there is uncertainty about what should be done, that would be an appropriate topic for discussion , individually or via the list.

 

Pat

Patrick Cassidy
MITRE Corporation
260 Industrial Way
Eatontown, NJ 07724
Mail Stop: MNJE
Phone: 732-578-6340
Cell: 908-565-4053
Fax: 732-578-6012
Email: pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx

 

---

From: Hans Teijgeler [mailto:hans.teijgeler@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 6:36 AM
To: Cassidy, Patrick J.
Cc: ONTAC Forum
Subject: RE: Shall we start? - sub (10)

Pat,

 

You wrote:

 

QUOTE

 

(10) So where do we start?

 

>>> [Barry Smith]

> Can we start to work out what the terms of the taxonomy should > be. Just a few. perhaps, to get us going. And what the > corresponding axioms will be?

>>> [John Sowa}That would be a very useful exercise.

 

Hey, guys! Over here! What about the merged ontology I put up on our web site? :-(

http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?CosmoWG/TopLevel

 

If you think the TopLevel it is so utterly useless as to not be worth discussing, fine, but please say so and say why and propose an alternative. Should we start even smaller? The OWL version has a few instances in it that can serve to illustrate some elementary DL reasoning methods. I think we need to demonstrate inference at the earliest stage.

 

UNQUOTE

 

I *did* tell you that the TopLevel was rather useless to me, because the links often end in an error Editing Denied!. I did send you an HTML file with a graph and OWL listing (with definition and example) of the top level of 15926, and suggested to you to ask the other "bloodgroups" to make theirs available without having to plough through manuals or listings. Most of the entity types I see on your TopLevel seem to me very specialized and probably too low in their hierarchy.

 

Regards,

Hans

____________________

Hans Teijgeler

ISO 15926 specialist

Netherlands

+31-72-509 2005

www.InfowebML.ws

hans.teijgeler@xxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

_________________________________________________________________
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)