Difference (from prior revision)
Added: 0a1,6
|
As noted by many when the use of ontologies began to extend and the number of ontologies expanded, a need arose to integrate ontologies also arose. An obvious approach is to aggregate or merge them, just adding parts to obtain a single ontology. Such a merger which would have all the vocabulary (object, relations attributes of the individual parts. But there are obvious differences in vocabulary and conceptualization between different ontologies so the task in not so simple and various types of "harmonization" were distinguished. {nid 2JP9} Usually Ontology Alignment is the term for the weakest form of integration. it requires minimal change, but it can only support limited kinds of interoperability. It is useful for classification and information retrieval, but it does not support deep inferences and computations.” {nid 2JPA} More advanced is Ontology Partial Compatibility: “Requires more changes in order to support more extensive interoperability, even though there may be some concepts or relations in one system or the other that could create obstacles to full interoperability.” {nid 2JPB} |