[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] meta ontology framework

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx
From: Alexander Garcia <cagarcia@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 10:17:58 +0200
Message-id: <20090406101758.koknrjc3k08o4wg0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
e-connections, that work is probably relevant. Although it is not  
exactly a meta ontology framework.    (01)

Zitat von paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx:    (02)

> 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.
> I had this conversation with Fabio Ciravegna  after a keynote speech, where
> he talks intesively of the  small ontology world (federated, distributed,
> networked ontology). Point taken. Agreed,
> But how, I asked , how are we going to get all these little ontologies to
> work with one another and possibly synchronise? Dont we need a kind of 'meta
> ontological framework'?    yes, said Fabio, everyone who is delivered an
> ontology needs a framework for it to be casted in and to align other
> ontologies with. And who is doing such work? Nobody that anybody knows of.
> Having read relevant portions of Azamat's work, I think what he calls
> unified ontology, and therefore raises eyebrow and argument like the ones we
> have had on thi list, and the one above, is a meta ontological framework
> (not an ontlogy metamodel like the OMG, but in the same direction). A system
> to align and support the synchronization of different part-ontologies
> I have no doubt that this kind of work is needed, although I think maybe it
> does not always come across cleary what is it exactly, what purpose, what
> benefits
> I think avoiding to deliver on a unified framework, means that
> 1. the (domain, application, task) ontologies alone will never be able to be
> integrated seamslessy and dynamically aligned  with other ontologies and its
> overall information environments
> 2. the gaps created by such built in systemic ontological misalignment will
> be very expensive to fix, and the 'need for more research' cycle will be
> self perpetrating (and oh yes, a consortium of top universities will deliver
> that..)
> I encourage  or anyone who intends to bring a novel perspective (and is
> trying to get funded) to
> make sure that their proposed ideas are demonstrable and directly aimed at
> fill existing gaps.
> Now burn me.
> pdm
> --
> 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
>    (03)

Alexander Garcia
http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/75943.html    (04)

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    (05)

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