[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [soa-rm] RE: [ontolog-forum] RE: [soa-rm] latest Draft ofConcept M

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <soa-rm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Rex Brooks <rexb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 14:58:15 -0800
Message-id: <a06230941bfc50157cc06@[]>
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)

Rex    (02)

At 1:18 PM -0800 12/13/05, Duane Nickull wrote:
>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?
>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 - 
>From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roy 
>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://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.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rex 
>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.
>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/
>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/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (04)

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