See: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2010-10/msg00218.html (01)
... The entire draft paper is published on our archives, as sent from
a FERENC KOVACS sent on Thu, 21 Oct 2010 08:10:35 +0100 (BST). (02)
An attachment is as much a contribution as text in a message body ...
I don't see how why they are, or should be treated differently. (03)
Regards. =ppy (04)
Peter Yim
Co-convener, ONTOLOG
-- (05)
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 7:03 AM, FERENC KOVACS <f.kovacs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Peter,
> I did not publish his contribution, I could not have done as it was an
> attachement. What I offered was name and adddress and an abstract. Please
> corrent me, if I am still wrong again.
> Regards, ferenc (06)
> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
>> To: FERENC KOVACS <f.kovacs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: [ontolog-admin] forum <ontolog-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Thursday, 21 October, 2010 14:55:48
>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] [OT] on contributions [was - from the [The
>>PragmaticWeb Research List]]
>>
>> Dear Ferenc,
>>
>>
>> I hate to do this to you again ... (believe me, I am not picking on you!)
>>
>> Referring to your post below ...
>>
>> I think "publishing" someone else's work hardly conforms to what one
>> would expect of a "member contribution." If you cite a few lines,
>> that's "fair use" ... if you provide a link to the document when
>> discussing it, that's what one might expect ... if you have the
>> authors permission to republish, you can do it elsewhere; Ontolog is
>> hardly the venue ... if you got this draft (in private, or say, as a
>> reviewer for a certain conference) for review, and you published this
>> openly without the permission of the author (or whoever entrusted you
>> to the review), that becomes an ethical issue at best; and is totally
>> violating our Contributing and IPR policies.
>>
>> Please observe our policies when contributing in the future.
>>
>>
>> Thanks & regards. =ppy
>>
>> Peter Yim
>> Co-convener, ONTOLOG
>>
>> p.s. another friendly reminder ... I had suggested before, that it
>> would be best if one leaves a blank line between paragraphs and bullet
>> points. It will help make our archives more accessible to the
>> community. Please do it, if you can. Thanks. =ppy
>>
>>
>> On 10/21/10, FERENC KOVACS <f.kovacs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > P.S. to my previous post:
>> >
>> > The bottom line on RELATIONS (AS VERBS) is
>> > that as a result of analysis involving "algebraic" operations you will get:
>> > 1) additive relations, such as parts and a whole, where interface is
>> > important
>> > when you do synthesis. Otherwise your chunking is not appropriate.
>> > 2) Productive relations, such as mental operations, including abstraction,
>> > isolation, formalization, etc. where nothing is dissected in reality, but
>> > new
>> > ideas are created all the time and where semantic primitives (objects,
>> > properties and relations) may be used to show the facet required in
>> > producing
>> > the related propositions. As the result of the synthsis you get back where
>> > you
>> > started from: Object - Existence/Non-existence, etc. The steps in this
>> > procedure
>> > may be numerically dentified so that you can find your way back. This does
>> > not
>> > look like a tree or a forest, but as a cycle, an infinite number of rings
>in
>> > SPACE and TIME as opposed to the mazes of knots in 2D
>> >
>> > By the way, I have just received a draft paper written still along the
>lines
>> > you
>> > tend to think about the subject
>> >
>> > If you are interested, contact the author as his paper is detached from
>> > here.
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > There goes a draft paper, comments are welcome!
>> >
>> >
>> > Semantic Data Aggregation through Semiotics
>> > Facilitating querying and inferencing
>> >
>> > Sebastián Samaruga
>> > http://xama.dev.java.net
>> > xama@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> > Abstract
>> >
>> > Trying to fill the gap between real business (intelligence) domain
>> > applications
>> > and semantics through extensive data aggregation and a functional approach
>> > to
>> > knowledge representation through semiotics.
>> >
>> > Introduction
>> >
>> > Given Semiotics, and Semantics, which is a branch of Semiotics, regarding
>> > Peirce, along with Syntax / Grammar, and Pragmatics, the relationship
>arises
>> > that given three entities regarded as: Sign – Concept – Object, considering
>> > (Sowa[1]) “A sign has three aspects: it is (1) an entitythat represents (2)
>> > another entityto (3) an agent” that our underlying model can be composed of
>> > three classes, namely:
>> >
>> > * Type
>> > * Value
>> > * Name
>> >
>> > Given this basic 'units' of knowledge, we should model our data according
>to
>> > some rules so we can make useful things given this arrangement. The first
>> > step
>> > is to find a common 'meta – meta – model” for the model stated before so we
>> > can
>> > 'import' data from disparate sources into it. The data is ultimately
>> > aggregated
>> > into this three structures given meaningful parsing of it (and
>configuration
>> > files).
>> >
>> >
>> > Meta Meta Model
>> >
>> > The underlying common model for entities coming from diverse data sources
>> > should
>> > allow to covert from and to the 'model' easyly. Let's begin considering
>what
>> > a
>> > data structure could become after decomposing it a little. We should
>> > consider,
>> > for example, rows, or statements (from RDF), predicates or columns from a
>> > relational database and tables or types (rdf:Type) for example, from these
>> > two
>> > kind of data sources (RDBMs and RDF).
>> >
>> > Lets arrange them into objects of different classes. The name in the left
>is
>> > the
>> > name of the class, and the three value tuple named 'statements' is the
>> > arrangement of statements about other entities the object has:
>> >
>> > Mapping:
>> > Statements: <Context, Entity, Role>
>> > Entity:
>> > extends Mapping. Statements: <Context, Mapping, Role>
>> > Context:
>> > extends Entity, Statements: <Entity, Mapping, Role>
>> > Role:
>> > extends Context, Statements: <Context, Mapping, Entity>
>> >
>> > So, the Statements part is the references the object has to other objects
>in
>> > the
>> > data space, in the form of 3-tuples. The inheritance relationship is for
>> > allowing reification and further composition. The correspondences between
>> > these
>> > objects and a data source are roughly this:
>> >
>> > A Mapping represents a row (in a database table) or an RDF statement.
>> > An entity represents a value in a table cell or an RDF object.
>> > A context represents a table in a database or rdf:Type value of statement
>in
>> > RDF.
>> > A role represents a database column or a RDF predicate.
>> >
>> > The population of the model should allow for triadic relationships to be
>> > stated
>> > over the model, and to be accessible for querying in a meaningful way. (And
>> > the
>> > use of configuration mapping files for population of upper models)
>> >
>> > For example, in a Value x, let's say (200Km), we could 'operate'
>> > semiotically on
>> > it and 'ask' it for a reference to its related Type object, given a Name,
>> > let's
>> > say ('Distance'), and once we have the Type we arrived from the value,
>> > regarding
>> > it as that name, ask the Type object for a Value named ('Speed') and get
>> > (100Km/h). If we query using the same mechanism for a Value named ('Time')
>> > we
>> > should get (2h).
>> >
>> > Architecture
>> >
>> > The idea is building level over level based on mapping configurations files
>> > in
>> > XML that describe how entities in a lower level populates entities in an
>> > upper
>> > level. This should give us the layers of metametamodel (for data load),
>> > model
>> > (for inference, semantics) and later a business and agent layer to ease to
>> > provide user interface, reporting and interaction layers.
>> >
>> > The whole system should provide, through the use of accessory packages,
>such
>> > as
>> > a framework for FCA (FCA[2]) and information gathering and retrieval
>> > (Watson[3])
>> > for the build up of a kind of Business Intelligence (2.0) application
>> > framework,
>> > with dimensional and aggregated views of semantically integrated data.
>> >
>> > The project page of the ongoing development effort for this framework is
>> > online
>> > and available at: http://xama.dev.java.net
>> >
>> >
>> > References
>> >
>> > 1. JF Sowa,
>> > “Ontology, Metadata and Semiotics”
>> > http://users.bestweb.net/~sowa/peirce/ontometa.htm
>> >
>> > 2. Formal concept analysis:
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_concept_analysis
>> >
>> > 3. Mark Watson ,
>> > “Practical Artificial Intelligence Programming With Java , Third Edition”
>> >
>> >
>> > _________________________________________________________________
>> > Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>> > Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>> > Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>> > Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>> > To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>> > To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>>
>
_________________________________________________________________
To Post: mailto:ontolog-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-admin/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/ (07)
|