[Top] [All Lists]

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

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:20:06 -0700
Message-id: <20080930172043.3A9A5138CF8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Lars Ludwig wrote:
===============  ==================  ==================  ===========
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.      (01)

:-) Lars
===============  ==================  ==================  ===========    (02)

While it's important to capture enterprise information in a consistent way
for may enterprises, it's also necessary for individuals to experiment with
personal extensions to the standard representation so that the enterprise
ontology can be improved over time.  So I think the answer is that each user
must have the ability to make changes to her personal implementation of the
enterprise ontology, while practicing the standard in most details.  So both
kinds are needed - a refereed enterprise standard ontology and a personal
projection of that ontology that can be edited by the individual.      (03)

-Rich    (04)

Rich Cooper
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com    (05)

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    (06)

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