[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] glossary of ontology terminology

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:55:43 +0700
Message-id: <c09b00eb0706180355g21af9bcbn7309048555539185@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks Denise

Yes of course we need a review process, but given the wealth of knowledgeable sources on this list I am sure we should be able to elicit some positive inputs to get us started
In case there is no consensus on any given definition, we can always have more instances,

Peter, is there a formal way of setting up this initiative with this group?

I am starting a similar process/procedure  with the w3 incubator group regarding he emergency management ontology with a similar goal..

Or shall I just start with pening a page and ask people to help refine the definitions in a civilized and open way using standard wiki culture? Ideally, we would make the glossary 'exportable' so that it can be pulled by other websites


Comments? (do people think this is an impossible task for some reason)


On 6/18/07, dbedford@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <dbedford@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I think starting a glossary of ontology terminology is an excellent idea.  I think, though, that there should be an editorial and peer review process in place to manage the quality of content and to facilitate resolution of variations.  And, that these processes should reflect the views and experiences of the larger community.

Best regards,

-----ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: -----

To: "[ontolog-forum]" < ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx
Sent by: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 06/17/2007 09:27AM
Subject: [ontolog-forum] glossary of ontology terminology


I am looking for a credible glossary of ontological terms, and I dont find anything easily accessible, comprehensive and uptodate that I can trust

I am aware there is a copyright issue - but we should try to go past that?

Wikipedia is still flakey,  and  this looks better carried out on the web as a  collective task.  It looks like we have a good collection of definitions for 'ontology' on the summit wikipage, which shows  that we can produce things  I wonder if we should start working towards creating definitions (ta community of practice starts with common terminology)

(we dont have to agree on everything, we could always have d1. d2 etc)

The problem I have today is to define 'applied ontology'  and  'formal ontology' and wonder if there is any further distinction
I have found some papers discussing in generally more than a page what a formal ontology is, but I am not satisfied
I find a useful reference on Jsowa glossary for formal ontology, but it does not seem to be contrasting other types of ontology
formal as opposed to terminological? or formal vs applied?

what is applied ontology exactly? (wikipedia entry is contradictory)

shall we start something? has someone compiled something that they want/can  share and open up for collective editing? (I would be surprised otherwisee)



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    (01)

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