ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] ISO merged ontology effort "MCO"

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Gian Piero Zarri <gian-piero.zarri@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Gian Piero Zarri <zarri@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 10:20:40 +0200
Message-id: <49DF0158.3040203@xxxxxxx>
Dear John,

Summarising ten pages into few lines, we can say that, by comparing the upper levels of OpenCyc, SUMO, DOLCE and the top-level of the CG hierarchy, the formal and conceptual differences are so evident that any form of "merging" is very difficult to envisage. You can add that the top level of the 'static' ontology of concepts of NKRL is based on the differentiation between 'sortal' and 'non-sortal' concepts - 'sortal' concepts can have direct instances, 'non-sortal' concepts, like properties or substances, cannot have direct instances. This introduces another one conceptual difference with respect to the existing proposals, and we could of course continue. By the way, with respect to NKRL, you know also that the 'really important' ontology in this language/environment is not the usual, 'static' one ontology, but the (new) ontology of complex events...

Anyway, the procedure you mention in your mail, which boils down to submitting '... a letter ballot to approve a study period to determine whether...' seems to be neatly wiser than that followed by the European Commission on this side of the Ocean, and consisting in wasting the money of the European taxpayers in launching questionable 14.7 million Euro projects like NeON - see Azemat's remarks few days ago. And this without taking into account the millions Euro already spent these past years to finance a Semantic Web industry that does not start off.

You should, may be, buy my book...


Best regards,


Gian Piero ZARRI

GPZ> Another SUO, ten years later ...

Not quite.  The SUO project had been approved by the IEEE as a
standards project.  This is a letter ballot to approve a study
period to determine whether they should have a standards project.
They can apply all the experience gained from the SUO to this
study project.

GPZ> ... read the Section "The Search for a Standard Upper Ontology"
 > in my "Representation and Management of Narrative Information"
 > book (Springer, 2009), pp. 113-123.

Could you summarize that point?

John Sowa


 
_________________________________________________________________
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    (01)

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