>Duane,
>
>I'm wondering why "one person or a small group"
>labeling some "thing" is a problem? Is this to
>say that one person or a small group can't label
>a thing correctly and comprehensively keeping
>the best interest of the end-user in mind? (01)
Well, one good reason is that on the Web, it is
impossible to know who the end user is or what
goals they might have, so it is impossible to
keep their best interests in mind. (02)
>If a taxonomy has thesaural properties, or is
>just a good-old fashioned thesaurus, it should
>be able to accommodate various view points with
>synonymy.
>
>As for the Slashdot.org "experiment," why
>generalize about how an ontologist or taxonomist
>would tag it? It sounds like, if there are,
>indeed, such unique terms being used to tag
>something at Slashdot.org that they would elude
>a person whose vocation is to tag content using
>the most widely-accepted terms, (03)
You seem to be supposing that there is such a
thing as the 'most widely-accepted term', which
begs the central question. It may be true, but it
remains to be discovered. I strongly suspect that
there simply is no such term in most cases. (04)
Pat Hayes (05)
>then you're really saying that "one person or a
>small group" is tagging things in a completely
>unique way at Slashdot.org! Isn't that a
>problem then?
>
>Keith DeWeese
>
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] [ontology-summit] PLEASE, PLEASE!!
>From: Duane Nickull <dnickull@xxxxxxxxx>
>Date: Wed, March 07, 2007 1:00 pm
>To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>John:
>
>I am still undecided. I am currently writing about the folksonomy pattern
>in a book on the web 2.0.
>
>The pattern is one that is useful in deriving the representation terms which
>in itself might be useful to the actual semantics to be accurate to a large
>section of society.
>
>The problem I see with a lot of taxonomies and ontology work is that one
>person or a small group decide what to label something and the label (tag)
>and the concept are joined at the hip. There will always be a large set of
>society that do not use the same label and will not agree with the
>ontology/taxonomy so the work gets dismissed and it starts all over again
>with another group who will "do things right for once and all".
>
>While this pattern is good for anyone seeking employment security in
>standards work, it is not serving our communities as a whole.
>
>Folksonomy's allow a larger section of the public to express their input
>into how something should be tagged. We are doing an experiment on
>Slashdot.org on story tagging and the results are very interesting. I doubt
>in any event that an ontologist or taxonomy author would have chosen the
>same tags for the stories that the members did.
>
>At the very least, folksonomies probably represent a very good way to derive
>accurate labels (representation terms) for things to facilitate the tag
>being meaningful and accurate to the largest section of society. The
>process does not however lend itself to being useful in terms of the logical
>world as most of the tags are opinions expressed from a very narrow point of
>view (the taggers own perception) rather than a bigger framed question of
>"what does this thing really mean?".
>
>Duane (sitting on the fence...)
>
>
>On 3/7/07 10:49 AM, "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Debbie and Duane,
>>
>> Both of you seem to imply that there is no clear definition.
>> According to Debbie,
>>
>>> To me, does not necessarily mean folksonomy is a slur. Does the term
>>> imply an ad-hoc unstructured or immature version of a formal ontology?
>>> Maybe on-the-fly the authors don't have or need an official term yet.
>>> It is what it is, like the rumors of no native american word for art,
>>> or no eskimo word for snow, "things" or "processes" that are so
>>> integral that so far, there has never been a need for them to be
>>> described from outside in a comprehensive overview.
>>>
> >> When writing formal specifications, it may be neccessary for terms to
>>> be applied by others outside a field. In this sense, a folksonomy
>>> might be more like an outline or a sketch. Sketches and outlines are
>>> hard to make also.
>>
>> If it is a sketch or outline, then call it that. But sometimes,
>> it might be intended as a taxonomy, a glossary, a type hierarchy,
>> a lexicon, a thesaurus, or whatever. But for one reason or another,
>> it doesn't meet all the requirements.
>>
>> My suggestion: If it is an informal or unstructured version of
>> some X, which doesn't meet all the requirements for a proper X,
>> then just call it an "unstructured X" or an "informal X".
>>
>> The word "folk" is used in a positive sense in "folklore" and
>> in a negative sense in "folk psychology." That would make the
>> word "folksonomy" doubly ambiguous: we're not sure what it means
>> or whether the speaker has a positive or a negative attitude.
>>
>> For such terms, I recommend the refrigerator policy:
>>
>> When in doubt, throw it out.
>>
>> John
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>> Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>
>--
>**********************************************************
>Sr. Technical Evangelist - Adobe Systems, Inc. *
>Chair - OASIS SOA Reference Model Technical Committee *
>Blog: http://technoracle.blogspot.com *
>Music: http://www.mix2r.com/audio/by/artist/duane_nickull*
>**********************************************************
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (06)
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 (07)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (08)
|