Re: [ontolog-forum] Re: [health-ont] NHIN RFI Responses

[ROBERT.GARIGUE@xxxxxxx]

Just to add to the discussion. I wanted
to pointed out an alternative definition of ontology given in the Dictionary
of XML Technologies and the Semantic Web  by Vladimir Geroimenko.


Ontology 1. An explicit representation
of the MEANING of terms in a VOCABULARY, and their interrelationships.
In an ontology definition language (such as OWL or RDF), an ontology is
the collection of STATEMENTS or other semantic definitions for a DOMAIN.
Ontologies are one of the STRUCTURAL CONSTRUCTS of the SEMANTIC WEB ARCHITECTURE.
Several SEMANTIC WEB TECHNOLOGIES can be used for building ontologies with
different levels of expressiveness. Note that originally the term “ontology”
was used in philosophy to refer to the study of the kinds of entities in
the world and how they are related. 2. An ONTOLOGY DOCUMENT. For examples
of ontologies, see the DAML Ontology Library at http://www.daml.org/ontologies/.

Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxxx> Sent by: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 01/20/2005 06:48 PM Please respond to Peter Yim; Please respond to "[ontolog-forum] "

To:        Adam Pease <adampease@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>         cc:        "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "[health-ont]" <health-ont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>         Subject:        Re: [ontolog-forum] Re: [health-ont] NHIN RFI Responses

ERRATA:

... the first line under the heading "What is an Ontology?"

should read:

... the first line under the heading "What iare Ontologies?"

Sorry!  -ppy
--

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:45:54 -0800, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Adam,
> 
> I totally agree with you in the case of our approach in the NHIN-RFI
response.
> 
> The statement I cited, though, isn't associated with our approach
or
> recommendation, but is  the first line under the heading "What
is an
> Ontology?" -- I assume, we are attempting, there, to explain
to the
> audience (who may, or may not be totally conversant with the nuances)
> what ontologies are all about.
> 
> Cheers.  -ppy
> --
> 
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:21:50 -0800, Adam Pease <adampease@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> > Peter,
> >    While ontolog's charter includes discussion of informal,
as well as
> > formal ontologies, I believe the case we made in the NHIN RFI
was for
> > benefits resulting from fully formal ontologies.  When describing
ontolog
> > in general, it's clear that you're right to keep our charter
broad, but in
> > terms of specific recommendations I think we have had some consensus
> > advocating the latter approach.
> >
> > Adam
> >
> > At 02:57 PM 1/20/2005, Peter Yim wrote:
> > >Additonal comments:
> > >
> > >Ref. the statement (used in our response):
> > >
> > >    "A formalized ontology is nominally an
explicit specification of
> > >the conceptual understandings shared by a community of practice.
..."
> > >
> > >I suggest we should use, instead:
> > >
> > >    "To the information science and technology
professional, an
> > >ontology is nominally an explicit specification of the conceptual
> > >understandings shared by a community of practice. ..."
> > >
> > >Rationale:
> > >
> > >1. I qualified it by adding  "To the information
science and
> > >technology professional" because, ontology may mean
something quite
> > >different to, say, the metaphysicists.
> > >
> > >2. I also took out the word "formalized", because
(a) Ontolog purports
> > >to deal with both formal and informal ontologies, and (b)
the
> > >discourse on "ontologies", even to the information
scientists, has
> > >(arguably) extended to cover "formal", as well
as "semi-formal" and
> > >"informal" ontologies.
> > >
> > >I just wanted to document this, as we'll quite possibly be
using this
> > >paragraph over-and-over again as a boiler plate in the future.
> > >
> > >Cheers.  -ppy
> > >--
> > >
> > >On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 15:03:11 -0800, Peter P. Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> > > > Bob et al.,
> > > >
> > > > Great Job! Kudos to all who contributed to the response.
> > > >
> > > > I've uploaded the response to our file repository as:
> > > >
> > > http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/health-ont/NHIN-RFI/NHIN_final-ontolog-rfi-response_20050118.doc
> > > >
> > > > Best wishes to the team ... when the next phase of
the NHIN activities
> > > > come around.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks & regards. -ppy
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Bob Smith wrote Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:58:40 -0800:
> > > >
> > > > > Attached is the Ontolog Community response to
the RFI issues by Dr.
> > > > > Brailer's Office.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >_________________________________________________________________
> > >Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> > >Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
> > >http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> > >Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> > >Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> > >To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> >
> > ----------------------------
> > Adam Pease
> > http://www.ontologyportal.org - Free ontologies and tools
> >
> >
>
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx