Good comments, Pat. Some comments in turn, indexed to yours: (01)
1) That's fine with me. I tend to agree we need to keep it simple.
2) Agree in principle, don't yet know about the time commitment estimate: I
hope not!
3) Agree in general: KIF is the most expressive language out there and in
principle is equivalent to OKBC, which is what Protege is based on. There is
not yet a mapping between KIF/Common Logic and OWL (very shortly to be
released!), though there is a Protege plugin for DAML+OIL, which is very close
to OWL. OILed and OntoEdit are alternatives to Protege and can handle
DAML+OIL, RDF/S. LOOM is an expressive description logic system (incomplete
vs. Classic, which is not as expressive but complete in formal sense) plus a
reasoner. But then Protege has some reasoning, i.e., PAL. And OILed has a
couple of description logic reasoners. OntoEdit has some description logic
reasoning.
4) Tools are aligned with languages: see (3).
5) I hope we can resolve these first two questions (Knowledge representation
language and tool/s) in much less time: perhaps 7-10 days? Agenda items for
the telecon next week to resolve? Then tackle and resolve the issues in the
rest of your (5) the following week? I know this is fast, but I like fast. (02)
Thanks,
Leo (03)
Patrick Cassidy wrote: (04)
> Suggestions for process:
>
> (1) any decisions that cannot be reached by consensus
> should be decided by majority vote. This requires
> a list of registered voting members. (I Suggest
> that any motion and two seconds can force a vote).
> Don't mess with Robert's rules, they were designed
> for live meetings. We can make up our own
> rules.
> (2) we may need an "executive committee" of members
> who are willing to commit to some significant
> allocation of time -- perhaps 5% of full-time
> (13 full days out of the year)??
> (3) First order of business should be decision on a
> format for representing the logical ontology.
> I would suggest KIF (or SKIF), and perhaps also
> OWL, since that seems to be where the Semantic Web
> community is heading. If OWL is not yet ready
> for serious use (I have no experience at all with
> description logics), perhaps LOOM?
> This gets into issues of ease of use. As best
> I can tell, to use LOOM requires that one install
> a LISP environment (are there executable versions?)
> This would inhibit the wide use of the ontology.
> KIF files can be written by word processor,
> and they serve to record the intended meanings of
> concepts adequately.
> (4) Second order of business would be adopting one or
> more tools to make the development easier. I like
> Protege, though I only use its simplest features.
> If JESS is recommended, I hope that any of us (like me)
> who have no experience yet with JAVA can have time
> to learn how to handle it.
> (5) I would suggest a maximum of one month to decide
> these two questions. Immediately thereafter,
> I would hope we can begin discussion of
> (a) the content of the ontology, starting with
> the structure of the topmost levels, and resolution
> of questions such as how to handle relations, roles,
> abstract objects, and granularity (with special
> reference to how they apply to the business domain);
> (b) a decision on whether only one structure will be
> allowed, or whether alternative representations
> will be allowed, providing that they are logically
> compatible and convertible to each other; and
> (c) the applications(s) that would be used to help
> keep decisions focused on usability rather than
> theoretical issues. I hope that at least one
> natural-language application will be developed.
> Does anyone work with a parser available for free?
>
> As examples of existing ontologies, Open CYC and
> the SUMO developed as part of the IEEE-Standard Upper
> Ontology discussions provide different views. Others
> such as SENSUS and Mikrokosmos exist, but are less
> easily available. I have made a crude conversion of
> the Open CYC and SUMO into Protege format -- this
> provides only the class hierarchy and the attached
> slots, but does not display relations of order greater
> than 2 (including binary or higher functions), nor
> does it display the subsumption relations among
> the slots. It does provide a good visual display
> of the general structure of the ontology. The
> Protege files can be found in the directory:
> ftp://micra.com/ontolog
> I am not certain that this conversion is permitted by
> the CYC permissions, but is seems to be, under the GNU
> GPL provisions, according to the license paragraph:
> > The OpenCyc Knowledge Base
> > The OpenCyc Knowledge Base consists of code, written in the
> > declarative language CycL, that represents or supports the
> > representation of facts and rules pertaining to consensus reality.
> > OpenCyc is licensed using the GNU Lesser General Public License,
> > whose text can also be found here. The OpenCyc CycL code base is
> > the "library" referred to in the LGPL license. The terms of this
> > license equally apply to renamings and other logically equivalent
> > reformulations of the Knowledge Base (or portions thereof) in any
> > natural or formal language.
>
> An alternative formulation of the upper levels is contained
> in the ontology I have been developing, available in Protege
> format at: ftp://micra.com/process/ (files PUOCYC1.*), which
> include some structures from the Open Cyc ontology. These three
> ontologies provide some examples of how the upper levels can
> be very different for different viewpoints. Many other
> examples are available. Even for the case where we are concerned
> with a particular domain, such as business, I think it is
> important that development of a consensus ontology begin
> with agreement on the main relations and the topmost levels
> of the ontology.
>
> Pat
>
> =============================================
> Patrick Cassidy
>
> MICRA, Inc. || (908) 561-3416
> 735 Belvidere Ave. || (908) 668-5252 (if no answer)
> Plainfield, NJ 07062-2054 || (908) 668-5904 (fax)
>
> internet: cassidy@xxxxxxxxx
> =============================================
> =============================================
>
> Bob Smith wrote:
> > Kurt, Thanks for the excellent summary!!!
> >
> > The 1-2:30pm Weds slot works for me.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Bob Smith
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kurt Conrad
> > Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:54 PM
> > To: Ontolog Forum
> > Subject: [ontolog-forum] UBL Process and Project Management
> >
> >
> > All,
> >
> > Please respond to this thread with process and project management
> > options for the UBL Ontology Project.
> >
> > For reference purposes, a summary of the ideas which have already
> > been raised in some form can be found at:
> >
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2003-03/msg00045.html#nid025
> >
> > /s/ kwc 2003.03.06 23:53
> >
> > ___________________________________________________________________
> > Kurt Conrad
> > 2994 Salem Dr. 408-247-0454
> > Santa Clara, CA 95051-5502 408-247-0457 (data/fax)
> > http://www.SagebrushGroup.com mailto:conrad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> > Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> > Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> > To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> > Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> > Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> > To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (05)
--
_____________________________________________
Dr. Leo Obrst The MITRE Corporation
mailto:lobrst@xxxxxxxxx Intelligent Information Management/Exploitation
Voice: 703-883-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S H305
Fax: 703-883-1379 McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (07)
|