Len (01)
I am glad that Ed is defending the case fore K Eng and Soft Eng well
enough, but let me add something (somehow I feel that your post is a
very inviting provocation :-) (02)
Please consider the following (03)
Given that (04)
(From wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineering) (05)
Engineering:
"[T]he creative application of scientific principles to design or
develop structures, machines, apparatus, or manufacturing processes,
or works utilizing them singly or in combination; or to construct or
operate the same with full cognizance of their design; or to forecast
their behavior under specific operating conditions; all as respects an
intended function, economics of operation and safety to life and
property."[2][3][4] (06)
And given that
all working processes today are supported by 'Information Technology' (07)
it follows quite simply that information technology is key to all
processes in modern operations (of all kinds, from manufacture to
biochemistry (08)
Now, consider that' knowledge' is a higher level of
refinement/abstraction in the data/information/knowledge/wisdom
pyramid (09)
Let's remember that in recent decades we have moved from data
centered computer science, to data in context, to data in context
applied to solved problems, or at least thats what some of us hope for (010)
Then you should can easily infer the relevance of knowledge and
softeng engineering is to computer science (if there is any such thing
in the first place), that is, for one, what makes the machines useful
to problem solving. (011)
I would fully agree that information technology and concrete buildings
are made of diferrent stuff, therefore the engineering principles of
soundness behind the construction of bridges would not
be useful when applied to distributed cognitive processes. (I think I
made this case a while back during the 'why do bridges fall' thread). (012)
Think of the parallel: in every type of engineering, architects and
designers concern themselves with concepts and behaviours,
while builders and engineers ensure that the things are build as
architects and designers expect to (013)
Now what worries me, is that many ontological artifacts and tools, as
well as much of the semantic web, are developed without the required
analysis and planning, and it shows. (014)
PDM (015)
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 1:24 PM, Len Yabloko <lenya@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Ed,
>
> I don't think you appreciate both: the intellectual challenge and practical
>implications of this discussion.
>
>>EB: We are talking about knowledge engineering, and in that field, "ontology"
>>is a term for a model of knowledge.
>
> To call something an engineering does not make it so. Before Industrial
>Revolution people were building and making things for the most practical
>reasons and in the most practical way they could imagine at the time. That
>does not qualify it as engineering. That was craftsmanship like carpenter,
>smith etc.
> Engineering results in consistent scalable production, which so called
>"knowledge engineering" does not. And it will not until it applies theories.
>
> One of theories is "Model Theory" which you so casually attached to "model of
>knowledge". This is another example of pseudo-engineering. In fact data
>modeling is only an engineering discipline withing a particular well
>axiomatized relational model with all available mathematical and technical
>tools. Likewise software engineering is only engineering within well developed
>calculus translated into true programing languages - all other "creativity" in
> software industry has not yet reached the level of engineering, despite
>considerable wealth created, which is not a proof of soundness (at least to
>me).
>
>
>
> Len Yabloko, Owner/CEO
> Next Generation Software
> www.ontospace.net
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> (016)
--
Paola Di Maio
School of IT
www.mfu.ac.th
********************************************* (017)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (018)
|