Re: [ontolog-forum] Model or Reality

["Adrian Walker" <adriandwalker@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Mathew --

AW: There seems to be a tension.  On the
one hand, a useful ontology is    supposed to be
"right", in the sense that it will not be necessary
or    desirable to change it much.

MW: I would express this as being "not wrong" rather than "right". By which I mean that it is (generally) a bigger problem if an ontology contains a statement that is incorrect, than that it omits one that is correct.

AW:  Interesting.  How would one zoom in on "bigger" ?  Something like the following?
An incorrect entry could cause unwanted interoperations that could be
hard to detect.  A missing entry could block interoperation that
is supposed to happen.  
But there is surely more to it than that?  Particularly if any of
the reasoning is nonmonotonic, so as to reverse the above.

                                                
Cheers, -- Adrian

Internet Business Logic
A Wiki for Executable Open Vocabulary English
Online at www.reengineeringllc.com    Shared use is free

Adrian Walker
Reengineering

On 8/18/07, matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx <matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear Adrian,

There seems to be a tension.  On the one hand, a useful ontology is supposed to be "right", in the sense that it will not be necessary or desirable to change it much.   

MW: I would express this as being "not wrong" rather than "right". By which I mean that it is (generally) a bigger problem if an ontology contains a statement that is incorrect, than that it omits one that is correct.

 On the other hand, an ontology is supposed to capture some aspects of the changeable real world.  But, if an ontology is used to support, say,  interoperation of 100 legacy systems in an SOA architecture, then making a change could break many of the interoperations.

So, a key aspect of using ontologies in practical situation would appear to be to have some reliable change management method or better, change management software.  The software would have to be able to run automated regression tests over the entire collection of SOA of legacy systems after each change to the ontology.  Also, the software would need a user interface  that business folks could understand, without mediation by IT specialists.

Sounds like quite a challenge.  Or, is there a better way? 

MW: I know this as Enterprise Architecture, which is all about engineering the changes in an enterprise including it supporting informatoin systems as one whole system. 

Regards

Matthew West
Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
Registered in England and Wales
Registered number: 621148
Registered office: Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/

_________________________________________________________________
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    (01)