[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Is there something I missed?

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Mike Bergman <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 00:14:48 -0600
Message-id: <49829AD8.6050801@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
John F. Sowa wrote:
> Ed,
> I just want to point out an important class of common triads.
>  > Examination of the dependencies in a ternary or quaternary
>  > relationship often reveals an intermediate object that has
>  > semantics and should actually be called out in creating
>  > a strong ontology for the domain in question.
> All the basic arithmetic operators, + - * /, take two inputs
> and generate one output.  Trying to represent simple arithmetic
> expressions with only dyadic relations creates very awkward,
> unnatural and unreadable statements.    (01)

Of course, the purpose of ontologies as specifically defined in 
this forum is not to be either natural or readable.  If we wanted 
readability, let's discuss literature.    (02)

Sure, it is great to be able to look at a text representation of 
an ontology and to understand it as human readable tokens.    (03)

But the real reason we are doing all of this is to engage 
reasoning and inference engines to assist us in doing things. Who 
cares what the language is or whether the basis is FOL, set 
theory, description logics or category theory?  Are there tools 
to handle these assertions?  Do we trust them with our businesses 
and livelihoods?    (04)

IMO stuff here recently is getting seriously untracked.  Is this 
the [ontolog-forum], the [sophistry-forum], the 
[arrogance-forum], the [put-down-forum] or the [do-nothing-forum]?    (05)

Great hopes for great ontologies backed by big federal dollars. 
What is this, the EU? (I know, that statement is parochial and 
out of line; I apologize; just keeping with the recent tone 
around here.)    (06)

I appreciate sitting at the feet of the masters, but it is 
tiresome to be subjected to re-treaded and tiresome tirades. How 
many times do you want to see my own URLs? Our elders are failing 
us. . . .    (07)

Don't like product promotions? How about silly puffery about 
"openness"?  How about constant ad hominem attacks on Cyc, OWL, 
semWeb, RDF, you name it?  Is self-interest only a direct 
relationship with ownership or authorship? What is this 
accomplishing?  Where is the shame? It is hardly like what this 
forum wants to achieve is widely appreciated.    (08)

So, let's be smart:  we'll eat our young and put down what is not 
our own because our narrow self interest or puffed-up ego is more 
important than reaching out to the broader public.    (09)

The respect I have had for many on this forum has been eroding 
(and perhaps even now for myself as I cease to be a mostly silent 
lurker). My goodness; where has grace and humility gone?    (010)

Forgive me for weighing in; just someone wondering why I still 
subscribe to this list.  Folks, for all of the erudition, I have 
had it up to here ...    (011)

Mike    (012)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (013)

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