[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] [Fwd: Re: [cuo-wg] Cross-Domain Semantic Interoperabilit

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Peter P. Yim" <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 06:53:34 -0700
Message-id: <4527B15E.1060307@xxxxxxxx>
Forwarding announcement from Jim Schoening about the renaming of 
CUO-WG to CDSI-WG, and Pat Hayes' comment, which is relevant, and 
  of great interest to quite a few of us in this community.    (01)

Regards.  =ppy
--    (02)
--- Begin Message ---
To: "Schoening, James R C-E LCMC CIO/G6" <James.Schoening@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Peter Yim" <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>, "common upper ontology working group" <cuo-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 15:02:46 -0500
Message-id: <p06230913c14c5fbb3028@[]>
Hi Jim    (01)

I would like to endorse your distinction between 
SI and CUO. During the last year a number of us 
in an project called IKRIS 
(http://nrrc.mitre.org/NRRC/ikris.htm ) have been 
working on an approach to achieving 
interoperability by establishing 
content-preserving mapping techniques between 
various existing ontology engines which use a 
variety of notations and logics, and are based on 
a variety of different ontological assumptions. 
One result of this has been a new (ish) Krep 
language, IKL, based on ISO Common Logic which 
has been deliberately designed to facilitate the 
definition of a variety of such mappings, in part 
by having a very flexible syntax and in part by 
using a variety of systematic naming conventions. 
I am optimistic that IKL is uniquely well suited 
to be a common notational framework for 
interoperability efforts, and would welcome the 
opportunity to work with others towards testing 
it out in a wider variety of settings. I am 
confident that almost any extant ontology or 
knowledge-representation formalism can be 
translated into IKL.    (02)

For an introduction/tutorial to IKL and the 
philosophy behind it, there is an authors draft 
of a 'guide' document available at    (03)

http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/IKL/GUIDE/GUIDE.html    (04)

One of the interesting 'results' of this effort, 
for me, is the fact that a number of 
traditionally intractable points of disagreement 
between rival ontological-technical views on 
things like the proper role of contexts, how to 
describe processes, events and change, etc., all 
seem to become relatively minor syntactic 
variations when appropriately mapped into IKL, 
and one can simply write axioms that connect one 
style of usage to the other. Rather then 
'resolve' these debates by declaring a single 
'standard' winner, therefore, this suggests that 
we can allow people to use whatever framework 
they find more congenial, and still be able to 
communicate with other users using different 
frameworks via 'interoperation theories' 
expressed in IKL.    (05)

(BTW, for ontogeeks: the chief way that IKL 
extends common logic is by providing names for 
propositions, and the chief technical achievement 
was to do this consistently in an untyped 
language.)    (06)

Pat Hayes    (07)

>Greetings CUO-WG Subscribers,
>         The Honorable John G. Grimes, Assistant 
>Secretary of Defense (Networks & Information 
>Integration) and DoD CIO, stated in a keynote 
>speech in Aug 2006, "We are making progress with 
>Communities of Interest, but we must now work on 
>interoperability between them..."   [Not exact 
>         I propose we change the name (and focus) 
>of this group to "Cross-Domain Semantic 
>Interoperability WG (CDSI-WG)," for the 
>following reasons:
>                 a. CDSI-WG expresses the 
>'objective,' as opposed to Common Upper Ontology 
>WG, which expresses one technical solution.   It 
>will be easier to build understanding and 
>support for the objective, after which we can 
>present the candidate technologies.
>                 b. There could be alternatives 
>to the Common Upper Ontology approach, which we 
>should explore and support. For example, the 
>Upper Ontology Summit in March 2005 (see 
>) proposed a solution consisting of a 'small set 
>of mapped upper ontologies.'
>         If we agree on this new focus, I propose the following thrusts:
>                 a. Build participation
>                 b. Develop list of candidate solutions
>                 c. Review enabling technologies 
>and Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of each 
>candidate solution
>                 d. Identify work efforts that 
>will mature the TRL of each candidate solution
>                 e. Package findings into 
>briefing charts that members can use to build 
>understanding and support
>                 f. Encourage self-organizing 
>independent teams to propose and manage projects
>         Let's first discuss this within the this 
>subgroup, and then recruit additional 
>particication from SICOP and other forums.  
>         Our current web site is at 
>James R. Schoening             
>US Army C-E LCMC CIO/G6 Office 
>Voice: DSN 992-5812 or (732) 532-5812  
>Fax: DSN 992-7551 or (732) 532-7551    
>Email: James.Schoening@xxxxxxxxxxx
>  _________________________________________________________________
>Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/cuo-wg/
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/cuo-wg/
>To Post: mailto:cuo-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Community Portal: http://colab.cim3.net/
>Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/cuo-wg/
>Community Wiki: 
>http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/CommonUpperOntologyWG    (08)

IHMC            (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.    (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                       (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                        (850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes    (09)

--- End Message ---

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    (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [ontolog-forum] [Fwd: Re: [cuo-wg] Cross-Domain Semantic Interoperability], Peter P. Yim <=