[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] just another thought regarding: Five challenges for "sem

To: "'Phil Murray'" <pcmurray2000@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Lars Ludwig" <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 18:06:45 +0200
Message-id: <00b801c92316$8e7450d0$ab5cf270$@com>
Dear Phil,     (01)

see my short comments below.
> In reality, the activity you describe is extremely complex and is
> intimately connected with the activities of others. (Sharable meaning
> does not come cheaply.)    (02)

d'accord    (03)

> Effective support of such "semantic" activities requires sophisticated
> applications that reference massive information resources, including
> ontologies. The tools I am imagining are for all "knowledge workers"
> and
> not just for "semantic specialists." The immediate benefits of such
> tools must outweigh their intrusiveness into our specific job roles,
> and
> all such applications must connect meaning across the organization or
> group.
> This is why Personal Information Managers fail.    (04)

Well, I humbly disagree: on the contrary. Let's twist thoughts a bit: A
shared (ontology) system can be described as being personal to each
participant. Ergo: All shared systems are personal systems. Ergo: You cannot
claim that all PIMs will fail. On the contrary, any shared systems not PIMs
have to fail, as they cannot be shared. If we start seeing semantic personal
knowledge management systems as personal proxies of knowledge artifacts
capable of being combined into 'shared' systems and thus a basis of
'semantic' communication, there won't be any contradiction left. One could
even maintain: A (shared) ontology management system not mapping the
personal ontology of each participant to the resulting shared ontology
generates the illusion of a shared ontology where actually only multiple
personal mappings to a publicly agreed-upon ontology exist. Let's call this
the 'shared ontology'-illusion. In other words, why not express personal
ontologies before actually sharing them. Shared ontologies will thus become
what they are: fuzzy, where fuzziness is an important quality to know about
and not to keep silent about.      (05)

:-) Lars    (06)

> Thanks for your comments.
>     Phil
> >    (07)

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    (08)

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