ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] NeOn projct goals

To: Azamat Abdoullaev <abdoul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Janez.POTOCNIK@xxxxxxxxxxxx, stefano.bertolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 09:02:01 -0700
Message-id: <af8f58ac0904020902v2c795115u17fe39424e37b618@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Azamat,    (01)


May I request that you take this conversation elsewhere. This mailing
list, or for that matter the Ontolog-CWE, is not the right place for
it.    (02)

This is the "collaborative work environment" for the ONTOLOG community
(who is set out to do what is in their charter
- see: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nidB ).    (03)

Your post has fails to demonstrate a spirit of collaboration, nor is
it helping advance our charter.    (04)


Regards.  =ppy    (05)

Peter P. Yim
Co-convener, ONTOLOG
--    (06)


On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 8:29 AM, Azamat <abdoul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Stefano wrote:
> Please visit the project's web site
>  http://www.neon-project.org/web-content/
>
>  (and download their freely available toolkit) to find out more about what
> they are doing and how far along they've got.
>
> I visited and what i found there let me share. Up to now, only about 170
> downloads, the size of the tools more than 100Mb, no any sensible
> documentation. When is FAQed what kind of beast is NeOn, its truly answered:
>      "The NeOn Toolkit is built on the code-base of OntoStudio, the
> commercial ontology engineering environment of ontoprise . There might be
> occasional references to OntoStudio in the documentation or in the GUI.
> Please replace them mentally with "NeOn Toolkit":
> http://www.neon-toolkit.org/content/view/25/42/
>
>
> As such, there is no original NeOn toolkit but so-called OntoStudio, which
> the EC "bought" for Euro 14, 7 m. No any sensible ontology but a worn OEE of
> Ontoprise, spamming my email for several years. There is a neon toolkit?
> Now wonder what kind of business you are doing there with Roberto Ciceroni
> as two Scientific Project Officers of Information Society and Media
> Directorate-General, Knowledge and Content Technologies.  Maybe the
> Commissioner Potocnik knows?
>
> Cheers,
> Azamat Abdoullaev
> http://www.eis.com.cy
>
>
>
>
> ---- Original Message -----
> From: <Stefano.BERTOLO@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <e.motta@xxxxxxxxxx>; <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 4:28 PM
> Subject: [ontolog-forum] NeOn projct goals
>
>
>> Hi Azamat,
>>
>> I am the project officer responsible for project NeOn, which you mention
>> below.
>>
>> NeOn argues that just as in software engineering software artifacts can be
>> built around libraries and components developed at different times by
>> different people (and evolving over time), so it should be possible for
>> the same to happen in knowledge engineer around ontologies as modular
>> components.
>>
>> NeOn is an environment designed to make it easier for knowledge engineer
>> Jane to find and integrate as components in her ontology other ontologies
>> independently developed by knowledge engineers Mary, Sue and Alice.
>>
>> Please visit the project's web site
>>
>> http://www.neon-project.org/web-content/
>>
>> (and download their freely available toolkit) to find out more about what
>> they are doing and how far along they've got.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> stefano
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> Stefano Bertolo, Ph.D.       Project Officer
>> European Commission Information Society DG, Unit E2
>> Mail: EUFO 1/293 - rue Alcide de Gasperi - L-2920 Luxembourg
>> Office: Euroforum building - 10, rue Robert Stumper - L-2557 Luxembourg
>> Tel. +352.4301.37435 Fax. +352.4301.38099
>> stefano.bertolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> DG INFSO/E2: http://cordis.europa.eu/info-management/
>> The views expressed in this e-mail are not necessarily those of
>> the European Commission
>>
>>
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Azamat
>>>Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 2:47 PM
>>>To: [ontolog-forum]
>>>Cc: John F. Sowa
>>>Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] semantics of the mKR language
>>>
>>>John wrote"
>>>AA> Mao said: "Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools
>>>>> of thought contend is the policy for promoting progress in the arts
>>>>> and the sciences ...".
>>>>
>>>> That's a good slogan.  But there's a big difference between actions
>>>> and slogans.  Remember that about 40 years ago, Mao let
>>>loose the Red
>>>> Guards, who tried to destroy the "flowers" (books, art work, and
>>>> scholars) of several millennia of Chinese arts and sciences.
>>>
>>>That's right, John.
>>>
>>>For the sake of historical truth, Mao is still numbered among
>>>the most important figures of the modern world history. The
>>>reason of his socio-political programs, as Cultural
>>>Revolution, was a partial political ontology, Legalism, one of
>>>Hundred School of Thought, and the desire to model the first
>>>Chinese Emperor, Qin. The legalistic ontology postulates that
>>>humans are basically evil, and good society comes from a set of laws
>>>and regulations and totalitarian bureaucracy.   Reading and
>>>scholarship are
>>>asocial, while farming and weaving are the means to correct
>>>humans. A comprehensive system of laws, administration
>>>techniques, position and power, military activities and
>>>economic expansion are the only means to a just prosperous society.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>As for RHM, he has an honest open mind with sincere intentions
>>>to move things. Nowadays, it is not easy to find somebody
>>>seeking not monetary profit but just the pride of accomplishment.
>>>
>>>His generall terminology is not a big problem, when giving a
>>>proper interpretation. Also, his research is not any load to
>>>the public, unlike those eating the public funds without
>>>knowing what they are to deliver. Here is a 'rationale' i met
>>>on the research page of one such project costing Euro
>>>14 m:
>>>
>>>[Most of the existing practices for the development of
>>>ontologies focus on a single ontology, on a global consistency
>>>of such an ontology, and, in principle, on a linear
>>>development. This is very restrictive- it is as if we all
>>>communicated in a single language and completely disregarded
>>>our cultural or historical specifics. Single ontology means
>>>single viewpoint on the problems, situations and solutions. If
>>>in our everyday life we use many different viewpoints, why
>>>can't designers of semantic applications and engineers
>>>developing knowledge models do the same? In NeOn, we see
>>>several dimensions, in which the existing single-ontology
>>>style of work need to be enriched].
>>>
>>>Which objective the whole project is aimed for: arguing for
>>>the single ontology or agaist it? That's a real puzzle, not
>>>Chinese puzzle. I wish to be mistaken, but it sounds as the
>>>folks don't know that they don't know what they are talking
>>>about and doing. I am afraid that many of these people are
>>>among (ontology) reviewers, passing judgments on other
>>>projects. That's a real harm.
>>>
>>>
>>>Azamat
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 4:26 AM
>>>Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] semantics of the mKR language
>>>
>>>
>>>> Azamat,
>>>>
>>>> I was trying to point out that there are many flowers blooming
>>>> in the context fields, but most of them have not been adequately
>>>> identified, analyzed, defined, and classified.
>>>>
>>>> AA> John wrote:
>>>>
>>>> JFS> The way you [RHM] use it in mKR falls roughly in the ballpark
>>>>> of various theories, but I and many other people who subscribe to
>>>>> this forum believe that your discussions about it are so vague that
>>>>> it doesn't come close to being considered an even marginally useful
>>>>> "theory".
>>>>
>>>> What I was saying is that just adding an at-phrase that represents
>>>> some undefined "view" does not constitute a theory.  Everybody
>>>> knows that different people have different views, and those views
>>>> are important for interpreting what they say.
>>>>
>>>> Merely acknowledging that fact does not add to our knowledge about
>>>> context, and claiming that mKR has a theory of context because of
>>>> its "at view" phrase is misleading, confusing, or false advertising.
>>>>
>>>> AA> Mao said: "Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a
>>>hundred schools
>>>>> of thought contend is the policy for promoting progress in the arts
>>>>> and the sciences ...".
>>>>
>>>> That's a good slogan.  But there's a big difference between actions
>>>> and slogans.  Remember that about 40 years ago, Mao let loose the
>>>> Red Guards, who tried to destroy the "flowers" (books, art work,
>>>> and scholars) of several millennia of Chinese arts and sciences.
>>>>
>>>> I don't believe that mKR poses a threat to the arts and sciences,
>>>> but I was suggesting that Dick might make a more useful contribution
>>>> if he tried to clarify his claims about context.
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_________________________________________________________________
>>>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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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)

_________________________________________________________________
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    (08)

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