ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] meta ontology framework

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 20:51:45 +0100
Message-id: <c09b00eb0904051251l10dd0db2xe210e9b76eec1d57@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Chris

thanks for reply

I am not interested in the misunderstood part of the exchange, or the spiteful part of it,  but only in the 'no need for a single ontology ' dissusion, therefore the carefull carving out of the tiny excerpt as a quote for reference.

Obviously people who are finalising ontologie, find themselves in need of another ontology to integrate the first ontology , and so on. It is happening as we speak.

I understand this is a good market strategy, but not an entirely honest long term solution. It is like signing someone up to buy a huge powerful machine (the web of knowledge), but only manufacure and deliver one component at the time.(part ontology)

How are we going to align the ontological fractal that is resulting from all the individual/local ontologies, so that we can reason on knowledge on the web as a whole, unless there is a super schema of sorts

thanks for sharing your insight

cheer
P

I think possible Apr 5, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Christopher Menzel <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 5, 2009, at 12:46 PM, paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
an earlier excerpt from a previous post is going around my head (sunday blues)

CM
The puzzle is why you don't grasp the fact that the writer is
obviously arguing against the idea of a single ontology.

At the cost of getting scolded,  this discussion is far from exhausted.

To the contrary, the discussion from which you lifted the above is entirely exhausted. Azamat had claimed that a certain passage he found on the NeOn website was confusedly arguing both for and against the idea of a single, unified ontology.  In my comment above, I was simply pointing out that he was wrong about that; the passage he had quoted was quite clearly arguing against the idea of a single, unified ontology.  He had simply misread it.  End of discussion.  I expressed no opinion whatever on the substance of that issue.

-chris



_________________________________________________________________
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
 



--
Paola Di Maio,
****************************************
Forthcoming
IEEE/DEST 09 Collective Intelligence Track (deadline extended)

i-Semantics 2009, 2 - 4 September 2009, Graz, Austria. www.i-semantics.tugraz.at

SEMAPRO 2009, Malta
http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/CfPSEMAPRO09.html
**************************************************
Mae Fah Luang Child Protection Project, Chiang Rai Thailand




_________________________________________________________________
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    (01)

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