Hi Pat, (01)
Sorry for the confusion, I meant "we" as those people in the
DoD Taxonomy Focus group. Not the ontology members. (02)
Hope that clears it up, (03)
- Mike (04)
Patrick Cassidy wrote on 1/23/2004, 10:17 AM: (05)
> Concerning your suggestion:
> Michael Daconta wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> > Note: for those also subscribed to rdf-interest, I apologize for the
> > cross-post.
> > As part of a taxonomy framework, we will be linking taxonomies
> > by requiring each term to be mapped to a WordNet synonym or synset.
> If by "we" [white man ;-)] you mean the Ontolog group,
> I would be careful that we don't get sidetracked by
> the need to 'dog' each concept we define in the WordNet
> database. Some of the concepts we need will be rather
> technical, and may well not exist in WordNet.
> Nothing wrong with trying to find a mapping to WordNet,
> as long as we don't strain to make round pegs fit into
> square holes. I'm not sure that there is any value
> in WordNet mappings for the Invoice ontology at this point.
> Wordnet has its own philosophy, not necessarily aligned
> with ours. WordNet is used a lot in NLP experimentation,
> but is not close to being a standard.
> 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
> 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
Michael C. Daconta
Chief Scientist, APG McDonald Bradley, Inc.
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 (08)