Clleagues,
Very important questions asked by Peter, replied by Matthew and
commented by Peter.
I am member of one more community and suppose it could be a good to
organize a collaboration between the two ones.
This community has a solid scintific ground for upper level ontology -
Viable System Model(VSM) of "father of Management Cybernetics" Stafford
Beer. On the 9-10 of March there was an annual Conference of the
community in Switzerland ( http://www.metaphorum.org ). You may look
at some abstarcts on the website and at my presentation -
http://www.ototsky.mgn.ru/it/papers/stafford_heritage21.pdf .
Also you may look at Metaphorum-2006 and Metaphorum-2005 -
http://www.ototsky.mgn.ru/it/abroad_menu.html . (01)
There is a mailing list of the community (UCD-STAFFORDBEER@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx )
and a "Collaboration Nets" Portal around the community activities
- http://www.platformforchange.org/ . (02)
Now after the conference there is a very interesting discussion around
and suppose it will be helpful for the "Ontology community" to be some
more close to it. Some years ago I wrote already about a problem of
"integration" the "ontology groups" -
http://www.ototsky.mgn.ru/it/21abreast.htm with referencing to the
EPISTLE Core Model (ECM) in particular . I suppose the ECM's 4D
approach is principle for the future upper ontology too and it must be
used as one of the fundementals for it along with the VSM. (03)
Regards,
Leonid Ototsky - http://ototsky.mgn.ru/it (04)
Вы писали 20 марта 2007 г., 16:35:32: (05)
> Matthew, Pat:
> Very valuable points. (06)
> To conclude, for me at least, I think my point about "authority" and
> "governance" should not be misinterpreted: I am definitely *not* an
> advocate for a single, top-down "authoritative" view of the world. It
> just won't work, is not desirable and is a fool's errand. I'm happy to
> see a thousand ontologies bloom, but the question of "who says this is
> so?" is still valid, even if the ontology is built by a community of
> one: my concern is that there are methods of discovering, negotiating
> and arbitrating between differing definitions and views of the world (or
> "your" part-view of the world) in a way that any user of someone else's
> ontology has some grasp of: how authoritative is the source/ who else
> shares this view/definition and how can I refer unambiguously to your
> definition? For example, the primitive RDF way of planting a flag in the
> ground - using a URL - and claiming that for your own, works up to a
> point (apart from its fundamental failing of not distinguishing between
> a resource and a pointer to or description of the resource - but that's
> another debate), as does giving unique identifiers to every term on
> WordNet, Wikipedia (even with its disambiguation pages, a neat touch
> AFAIC). The bottom-up approaches of Flickr, etc serve a value but there
> are so many "close encounters" of different terms that mean the same, or
> vice versa, it seems that a lot of potential network effect is lost. The
> Web succeeded by deploying three simple protocols together with very
> fault tolerant parsers, browsers handling poorly formed HTML. What I
> guess I'm looking for is an equally simple set of protocols that can
> give more lay users a sense of "OK, I get it more or less - these are
> the basic ground rules and off I go...". Idealistic, maybe; Necessary,
> surely. (07)
> Regards, (08)
> Peter (09)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
> Sent: 20 March 2007 09:36
> To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology and methodology (010)
> Dear Peter, (011)
> Let me start to try to answer your questions: (012)
>> who should be involved in ontology development? (013)
> MW: Domain experts - to give a lay description of requirements (014)
> MW: philosophical ontology experts - to perform ontological analysis
> of the requirements (015)
> MW: Logic experts - to make sure that the axioms say what they are
> supposed to and are well written (016)
> MW: Project managers - to keep the show moving along and manage
> issues and their resolution (in my experience it take a special
> kind of project manager to be helpful with ontology projects) (017)
>> What qualifies them? and how can you judge? (018)
> MW: Probably peer recognition. (019)
>> How do you start to develop an ontology? (020)
> MW: Find someone with a problem that needs an ontology to solve
> it and is prepared to pay for having the solution. (021)
> MW: After that, look round for some starting points that are
> better than a blank piece of paper. (022)
>> Should you? (023)
> MW: Yes. The potential savings from applying ontologies to
> appropriate problems are significant. (024)
>> How do you introduce quality control? (025)
> MW: It is just a matter of ordinary quality management. Users
> and other interested parties are invited to identify issues.
> An issue identifies a defect (something that prevents the
> ontology from fulfilling its purpose - of course that means
> your ontology has to have a purpose). Not liking an
> ontological choice is not an issue unless you can show there
> is something that choice means cannot be supported. (026)
>> Who decides? (027)
> MW: I think Pat is right about Mavens. I think you need 3 or
> 4 of these to build an ontology. There should be little change
> in the make up over time. These guys get to decide how to meet the
> requirements and how to respond to the issues that are raised. (028)
>> Where's the process when you need one? (029)
> MW: Well there are lots of processes you need, and agree rules.
> One of ours is that one counter-example is enough. We also
> (for ISO 15926) have the ISO process for exposing the ontology
> and managing issues, and recognising progress and status.
>>
>> Any answers on *these* questions? ;-)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pat Hayes
>> Sent: 19 March 2007 21:04
>> To: Cassidy, Patrick J.
>> Cc: [ontolog-forum]
>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology and methodology
>>
>> >My advice is to boldly go and do what makes sense in your domain....
>> >It is unlikely you will run into
>> >logical contradictions, and in engineering the information
>> >infrastructure, aesthetics should take a second place to
>> >comprehensibility and efficiency.
>>
>> +1. Should be written in pokerwork and hung over the entry door of
>> every Ontology Engineering Laboratory :-)
>>
>> Pat Hayes
>> --
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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 (030)
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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 (031)
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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 (032)
--
С уважением,
Leonid mailto:leo@xxxxxx (033)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (034)
|