Thanks Adam for responding to my post. (01)
--- Adam Pease <adampease@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: (02)
> Scott,
> SUMO and MILO were intended to be task and
> domain independent, although
> any particular application will certainly not
> use every term in each
> ontology. The domain ontologies of Finance,
> Transportation etc are of
> course more specific. <snip> (03)
As soon as I read this, I got to thinking that I
probably got the essense of Nicola's paper wrong.
I did some digging and came up with another paper
that explores the ideas of the first paper in
greater detail. (04)
http://www.loa-cnr.it/Papers/FOIS98.pdf (05)
Unfortunately, I've not had a chance to study
this as much I could. But interestingly, Nicola's
later diagram includes a Top-Level ontology
mapped to Domain a Task ontology and finally the
Application ontology. And based on Adam's
comments this structure is making much more sense
to me. (06)
I've read more than a few posts recently that
discusses the problem of Context. I'm wondering
if Nicola's ideas addresses those issues as well. (07)
Scott
_________________________________________________________________
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 (08)
|