ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog] UBL in the Press

To: ontolog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Sam Hunting <shunting@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 22:15:12 -0500 (EST)
Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0301192212580.30102-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Sun, 19 Jan 2003, Leo Obrst wrote:    (01)

> Amen, Bill. I am a strong advocate of top-down ontologies (and  so I recuse
> myself), and so will not say more than you've said, except: The best approach 
>(in
> my view) is a mixed top/bottom: harvest the documents you need to cover from 
>the
> bottom-up, induce their requirements upward, and come down from the top with
> principles that seem to match.    (02)

Pragmatically, I'm with you, Leo.     (03)

And I'm not trolling when I was the question --    (04)

The phrase "incomplete ontological effort" intrigues me. What is the
operational definition of a "complete ontological effort" -- surely this
is entirely a function of level of effort?    (05)

> "William E. McCarthy" wrote:
> 
> > No matter how loud the marketing drumbeats get for UBL, there can be no
> > disputing that it represents at its core a bottom-up  approach to
> > developing a business process ontology.  You can generalize documents
> > forever and still not unearth basic economic and business principles of
> > economic exchanges.  Documents add unnecessary components (like details of
> > manual reconciliations/bookkeeping and/or paper exchange).  Documents also
> > hide components that should be analyzed and generalized (like
> > implementation compromises of ideal models).  Additionally, I do not see
> > how the state of affairs at a process or collaboration level can be tracked
> > by seeing which document was sent last.
> >
> > Harvesting existing knowledge (as UBL does) is a good partial
> > approach.  However, until UBL attacks some of these conceptual issues from
> > the top down, it will be an incomplete ontological effort, no matter what
> > personalities or companies are behind it.
> >
> > Bill McCarthy
> > Michigan State
> >
> >   moy rAt 02:05 PM 1/18/2003 -0800, you wrote:
> > >As the UBL release is nearing, we are starting to see their story covered 
>in
> > >trade press now.
> > >
> > >Take a look at the eWeek article:
> > >
> > >   Push for UBL Protocol Gathers Momentum
> > >   By Darryl K. Taft / January 13, 2003
> > >
> > >   http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,825911,00.asp
> > >
> > >-ppy
> > >
> > >--
> > >To post messages mailto:ontolog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >An archive of the [ontolog] forum can be found
> > >at http://ontolog.cim3.org/forums/ontolog
> >
> > Bill McCarthy
> > Michigan State University
> > 517-432-2913
> > http://www.msu.edu/user/mccarth4/
> >
> > --
> > To post messages mailto:ontolog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > An archive of the [ontolog] forum can be found
> > at http://ontolog.cim3.org/forums/ontolog
> 
> --
> _____________________________________________
> Dr. Leo Obrst  The MITRE Corporation
> mailto:lobrst@xxxxxxxxx Intelligent Information Management/Exploitation
> Voice: 703-883-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S W640
> Fax: 703-883-1379       McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To post messages mailto:ontolog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> An archive of the [ontolog] forum can be found
> at http://ontolog.cim3.org/forums/ontolog
>     (06)

Sam Hunting
eTopicality, Inc.    (07)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Turn your searching experience into a finding experience."(tm)    (08)

Topic map consulting and training: www.etopicality.com
Free open source topic map tools:  www.gooseworks.org    (09)

XML Topic Maps: Creating and Using Topic Maps for the Web.
Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-74960-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------    (010)

--
To post messages mailto:ontolog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
An archive of the [ontolog] forum can be found
at http://ontolog.cim3.org/forums/ontolog    (011)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>