[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Terminology Question concerning WebArchitecture and

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: dbedford@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 15:33:27 -0400
Message-id: <OFE6210DAF.1D85A6D0-ON85257321.006A63D3-85257321.006B6ED0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Azamat,    (01)

I do not believe it is necessary to have a common world ontology in order to
build an intelligent, semantic web.  The more that I have monitored the
discussions in Ontolog, the clearer it becomes to me that a common world
ontology may possibly have the opposite result.    (02)

Wouldn't assuming that there can be a single world ontology at the core of the
semantic web mean that --  we all think alike, thinking alike is good,
differences must always be resolved and harmonized, and that someone's view will
always be less valued than anothers.   From a simple innovation and creativity
perspective, I'm not sure I want an intelligent, semantic web that behaves in
this way.  I think this type of semantic web would be very limiting in more ways
than one!    (03)

Rather than a single world ontology which would presume a single world view to
some degree, I would rather be able to define what I mean by something and
expect an intelligent agent to resolve the differences between what I mean and
what you mean through iterative negotiation.  To this end, more and more
published ontologies - particularly domain ontologies - would get us to the
semantic web faster than the endless discussions about a single world ontology.    (04)

I apologize if my comments seem simplistic and primitive --    (05)

Best regards,
Denise    (06)

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    (07)

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