[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Invitation to an Ontolog technical discussion - Met

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 18:10:41 -0800
Message-id: <420D65A1.70300@xxxxxxxx>
Thanks, Nicolas.    (01)

ERRATA: The line (7th from the top of the Announcement) about the 
date of the event should read:    (02)

*When: Thursday, Feb. 24, 2005 *    (03)

--    (04)

Nicolas F Rouquette wrote Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:57:18 -0800:
> We are pleased to invite you to participate to a technical discussion 
> during our upcoming regular conference call session.
> Topic: Ontologies & Meta-ontologies: practical considerations
> When: Thursday,, 2005
> Start Time: 10:30am PST / 1:30pm EST
> (World Time: 
> Session Duration: ~ 2 Hours
> Dial-in Number: 1-702-851-3330 (Las Vegas, Nevada)
> Participant Access Code: "686564#" Discussion coordinator: Nicolas 
> Rouquette    (05)

> Abstract:
> Using the analogy associating an ontology as an analog to the concept of 
> a reusable software library with its API, then we can look towards 
> modern approaches of reusable software development practices as an 
> inspiration for modular ontology development. The naive approach for 
> modular, object-oriented software development relies heavily on 
> subclassing as the mechanism to decouple a reusable module (i.e., the 
> superclass) with a specific usage of that module in a given application 
> context (i.e., the subclass that derives from the module's superclass). 
> There is a growing body of evidence that this approach is inherently 
> brittle in software engineering. (for more on this topic, see see 
> Clemens Szyperski's Component Software book, chapters 5 & 6 -- 
> http://research.microsoft.com/~cszypers/Books/component-software.htm 
> <http://research.microsoft.com/%7Ecszypers/Books/component-software.htm>)
> The analogy holds for formal ontologies as well. Here, "formal ontology" 
> refers to an ontology that has rigorous formalization of some kind 
> suitable for a reasoning process to make inferences based on the 
> ontology's axioms, properties and rules. Well-known examples of formal 
> ontologies include: SUMO, PSL, DOLCE. The OntoClean 
> <http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntoClean> methodology is an 
> excellent case explaining the pitfalls and limitations of subsumption 
> for organizing extensible or modular ontologies. This has led to the 
> notion of "meta-ontology", initially used as an ontology where the 
> (meta) ontology provides a taxonomy of concepts and properties used for 
> capturing the meaning of things in the application-specific ontology 
> using annotations expressed in terms of the meta-ontology. This idea has 
> been documented in the semantic web best practices group 
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/, e.g., with the 
> "classes-as-values" pattern http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-classes-as-values/ 
> commonly used for annotation purposes.     (06)

> Topics:
> The discussion topics are focused on the practical aspects of ontology 
> development, maintenance and evolution
> within considerations of community-based collaborations that depend 
> heavily on standards of some kind (e.g., OWL, DIG),
> published methodologies and peer-accessible tools (e.g., open source) 
> and ontologies without impractical intellectual property restrictions.
> Within this scope, the topics of the technical discussion will address 
> practical considerations
> about the relationship of ontologies & meta-ontologies in the sense of 
> an "upper" ontology
> used to make statements about a "lower" ontology in logic (e.g., 
> OWL-Lite, OWL-DL or OWL-Full).    (07)

> These considerations include, but are not limited to:
> - Including annotations as part of ontological reasoning
> - Separating an ontology from independent annotations of that ontology
> - Using meta-ontologies for describing the refinement relationship of 
> one ontology as a specialization or a view of another ontology
> - Guidelines for choosing and using different kinds of "meta-ontologies" 
> such as universals (e.g., OntoClean) vs. particulars (e.g., DOLCE)
> - Using "formal" ontologies (e.g., OntoClean, DOLCE, SUMO) without a 
> degree in philosophy
> - other topics suggested by the discussion participants    (08)

> You are encouraged to add your comments, suggestions, questions, 
> problems, solution and other relevant information on the discussion page:
>     (09)

> * About the coordinator: *
> Nicolas Rouquette, Jet Propulsion Laboratory / California Insitute of 
> Technology.
> See: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?NicolasRouquette    (010)

> Please refer to details on the session wiki page at:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2005_02_24    (011)

> Please point your browser to this wiki page during the session.
> Shared-screen support (VNC session) will also be available and be
> started 5 minutes before the call. 
> <http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2005-02/msg00007.html#nid015>    (012)

> Looking forward to having you at the session.
> Regards,
> -- Nicolas.
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    (013)

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