I actually think it might be a good idea, if 'twere done were best
done in the soa-rm context where we could perhaps define a richer set
of relationships between conceptual entities. (01)
Regards,
Rex (02)
At 1:18 PM -0800 12/13/05, Duane Nickull wrote:
>Roy:
>
>I think the gist of this thread is to answer the question "do
>Concept Maps require formal definition for interpretation" and if
>yes, where should that be done. The vendors should definitely be
>involved IMO.
>
>It seems like there is consensus (or at least a lack of dissention)
>for CM to be formalized. This could perhaps happen in the OASIS SOA
>RM TC. Does anyone have any other opinions?
>
>Duane
>
>
>*******************************
>Adobe Systems, Inc. - <http://www.adobe.com/>http://www.adobe.com
>Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT http://www.uncefact.org/
>Chair - OASIS SOA Reference Model Technical Committee
>Personal Blog -
><http://technoracle.blogspot.com/>http://technoracle.blogspot.com/
>*******************************
>
>
>From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roy
>Roebuck
>Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 1:15 PM
>To: [ontolog-forum] ; soa-rm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: [soa-rm] RE: [ontolog-forum] RE: [soa-rm] latest Draft
>ofConcept Map / N-ary Documents specification?
>
>I've been doing concept mapping for a quite a while, and I've never
>seen it portrayed so technically as in this forum.
>
>While we're engaging in discussion about concept maps, has anyone
>invited vendors of concept mapping tools, such as
><http://www.inspiration.com/>http://www.inspiration.com,
><http://cmap.ihmc.us/>http://cmap.IHMC.us, or
><http://www.agilense.com/>http://www.agilense.com (using their
>Graphical Designer) to participate? While Inspiration and CMAP are
>solely concept mapping tools, Agilense is a knowledge modeling and
>management server I use for my enterprise management services and
>enterprise architecture efforts.
>
>Roy
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rex
>Brooks
>Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 3:48 PM
>To: [ontolog-forum] ; soa-rm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: [soa-rm] RE: [ontolog-forum] RE: [soa-rm] latest Draft
>of Concept Map / N-ary Documents specification?
>
>Understood Duane,
>
>I was just expressing my personal opinion and citing my own peculiar
>use of concept maps because I find them very handy for getting ideas
>out of my head and into a form where it is somewhat easier to work
>with them. I actually didn't start using them until prompted by your
>work. So I will be quite content to use them on my own regardless of
>whether they become standardized notations. I will just have to be
>careful not to let my scratchpad work get saved in a formal document.
>I also plan to start using them in a networked whiteboard application
>I'm playing with. BTW, I wasn't familiar with YAMMV, and had to look
>it up. YUP.
>
>The relationships actually make my point, since I can write in
>whatever I want, or whatever I think I'm modeling until it finally
>becomes more clear. However, you are quite correct that
>interpretation becomes darn near impossible without some rules.
>
>Regards,
>Rex
>
>At 9:39 AM -0800 12/13/05, Duane Nickull wrote:
> >Rex said: "I would actually prefer if concept maps stayed informal or
> >relatively informal for usefulness in my brainstorming process before
> >moving on to my personal process for noodling out constraints."
> >
> >This has been identified as a problem since it leads to different people
> >interpreting things differently.
> ><Rant>
> >For example
> >
> >"A uses B"
> >
> >How would *you* answer the following:
> >
> >1. Can A exist without B?
> >2. Is B aware of A?
> >3. Is A aware of B?
> >4. Is the reciprocal relationship "B is used by A" true?
> >5. Does B need at least one A to exists before it can exist?
> >6. Is B a complete concept without A?
> >7. Does A always use B?
> >8. add transitive, reflexive and all variants....
> >....
> >
> >I have avoided use of cardinality but others think that cardinality
> >exists in concept maps. Does this relationship mean exactly one A and
> >one B must be present for the concept to be complete or does it
> >represent multiples. I have seen concept maps with plurality such as:
> >
> >"machines are used by workers"
> >
> >Why is workers plural? Does it imply that there must be more than one
> >worker?
> >
> >What about instance, parent relationships?
> ></Rant>
> >
> >While you may answer these very clearly, the exact interpretation is not
> >ubiquitous and YAMMV.
> >
> >Duane
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >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
>
>
>--
>Rex Brooks
>President, CEO
>Starbourne Communications Design
>GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
>Berkeley, CA 94702
>Tel: 510-849-2309
>_________________________________________________________________
>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
> (03)
--
Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-849-2309
_________________________________________________________________
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 (04)
|