[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Two ontologies that are inconsistent but both needed

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Kathryn Blackmond Laskey <klaskey@xxxxxxx>
Cc: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Smith, Barry" <phismith@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:59:05 -0600
Message-id: <20070612170337.B509D109418@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
At 10:30 AM 6/12/2007, Pat Hayes wrote:
> >Barry and Pat,
> >
> >>   >>>  I just choose (like driving on the left). I choose to distinguish
> >>>>>between continuants and occurrents.
> >>>>
> >>>>Fine. But then the question arises as to whether your ontological
> >>>>framework, which requires this distinction, is of more use than a
> >>>>similar one which does not.
> >>>
> >>>I think we need to test this empirically. So far we are winning --
> >>   >the GO is, by several measures,the world's most successful ontology.
> >>
> >>Ah, that is more like it. I agree you are winning. And it is
> >>refreshing to see philosophical arguments replaced by straightforward
> >>appeals to power and funding. As I have no funds to compete with, you
> >>will no doubt go on winning :-)
> >
> >I hope you boys have fun slugging it out on the playground.  :-)
>Yeh, Im sorry about the slightly bilious tone there. I suffer from
>philosophy reflux syndrome.
> >  In
> >the meantime, people are going to build ontologies, and they are
> >going to look to us for leadership on how to do it.  Barry's legions
> >are busy building them with continuants and occurants.  Pat doesn't
> >have any funding, he says.  So he can't amass legions who will build
> >ontologies with spatiotemporal processes.  Alas.  But no doubt
> >someone will read his posts, and with dreams of matching Barry's
> >glory, start amassing armies to build them with spatiotemporal
> >processes.  Then, some day, somebody is going to have an urgently
> >important problem that requires these ontologies to interoperate.
>I don't think that will be much of a problem, most of the time.
>Translating from c/o to spatiotemporal is really not much more than
>judicious deletion. Translating in the other direction will require
>some pattern-recognition to 'see' c- and o-type formulations, and
>maybe in some cases splitting a concept into a continuant and its
>lifetime (which are identified in spatiotemporal).
>I would say, in passing, that my views on this issue have been
>informed in large part by  trying to create useful interoperation
>between a number of different ontologies.    (01)

I agree with Pat. Indeed I could embrace the views expressed in these 
last two paragraphs verbatim.
I will refrain from making jokes about what we get from judicious 
deletion of, e.g., all the nouns in the Bible.
BS    (02)

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    (03)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>