>Inline:
>
>
>On 3/20/07 10:58 AM, "Cassidy, Patrick J." <pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Pat Hayes raised several issues I think are worth further discussion,
>> but I would like to focus on 2 of them:
>> (1) Hasn't building a common foundation ontology already been tried?
>
>DN: I believe both SUMO and DOLCE qualify here, yes? (01)
SUMO, but not DOLCE. I would describe DOLCE as a framework rather
than an ontology. But given PatC's further explanation, I concede
that what he is talking about has never been achieved. An 'upper'
ontology isn't the same thing as a basic set of concepts out of which
you can define all others. That is much more ambitious. (02)
> If by foundation, you
>mean the expression of first order logic. (03)
No, I meant it in PatC's sense. (04)
>SUMO has got to be my most
>favorite work in the ontology field I have seen to date. (05)
I have to admit it is a lot better than I thought it was going to be :-) (06)
Pat
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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)
|