On 16 Mar 2007 10:44:22 -0500, Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> ...
> but THIS FORUM is centrally
> concerned with "ontology" in one, rather
> technical, sense: the one quoted in your (d)
> above; which, as Chris M has pointed out, is a
> definition which THIS FORUM has formally adopted
> as its working definition. (01)
[ppy] Thanks, Pat. Just as a point of clarification ... (02)
Chris Menzel alluded to a definition (ref:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/2007-03/msg00024.html#nid03
) that was only a *proposed* working definition from Michael
Gruninger. (03)
The set of definition that this forum has managed to *adopt* so far,
goes back to Leo Obrst's "What is an Ontology?" talks in Jan-2006 -
see: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2006_01_12#nidOHT (04)
The good news is Leo and Michael are now working together to help get
us towards a "framework", that would allow us to deliver the Summit
objective of "Ontology, Taxonomy, Folksonomy: Understanding the
Distinctions." (05)
Once again, I solicit everyone's input to help us get there. (I'll be
releasing a survey shortly, and I hope we hear back from you all.) (06)
Thanks & regards. =ppy
-- (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)
|