ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology building methodology

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Peter P. Yim" <yimpp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 11:02:42 -0800
Message-id: <3E80A7D2.1040603@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sounds great, Mike. Thank you for looking into it and sharing your 
insight.    (01)

By the way, I've updated the "Metholodology" wiki page (see 
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Methodology ).    (02)

Everyone: please continue to post your thoughts.    (03)

-ppy
--    (04)

MDaconta@xxxxxxx wrote Tue, 25 Mar 2003 11:20:34 EST:
> In a message dated 3/6/2003 3:49:20 PM US Mountain Standard Time, 
> lobrst@xxxxxxxxx writes:
> 
>> By the way, both of these papers are on Chris Welty's home page:
>> http://www.cs.vassar.edu/faculty/welty/.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> In looking at these papers, I don't see these methodologies as
> being in competition.  I see it as an issue of granularity.  The
> welty and guaranino papers discuss finer points of ontology
> construction (identity, rigidity, dependence) which can easily
> be included in Step 4.1 which is "ensuring that the class
> hierarchy is correct".  In other words, the process is a multi-pass
> process.
> 
> Thus, I would recommend that the overaching framework be the
> Ontology 101 process with a "Welty and Guarino" pass in step 4.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> - Mike
> -------------------------------
> Michael C. Daconta
> Chief Scientist, Advanced Programs Group
> McDonald Bradley, Inc.
> www.daconta.net    (05)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (06)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>