[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Incompatibilities in 3D to 4D

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Michael Gruninger <gruninger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:16:10 -0400
Message-id: <49BEC19A.70607@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Pat,    (01)

Pat Hayes wrote:    (02)

> Ali Hashemi wrote:
>> I guess, if there are no serious errors in this email and the last, 
>> are there any practical considerations which might hinder such 
>> interoperability (aside from the non-existence of axioms thus far)? 
>>  Is the 3D-4D debate really an issue for people developing actual 
>> ontology applications?
> It is, because there really are some tricky problems in making the 
> various formal ontologies cooperate, and because both views have been 
> used in actual deployed ontology standards. So we really do have an 
> interoperability issue here. I don't say the situation is impossible, 
> but it is of more than purely theoretical or philosophical interest.    (03)

What are the actual deployed ontology standards and where are their 
axiomatizations?    (04)

I realize that ISO 15926 is always promoted as a 4D ontology, but it is 
not axiomatized.
One point of Ali's posting is that until we get a concrete fixed set of 
axioms for a 3D ontology
and a concrete fixed set of axioms for a 4D ontology, we cannot say 
anything about whether
or a semantic mapping exists or what such a mapping requires.    (05)

- michael    (06)

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    (07)

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