And why I find folksonomies intriguing. (01)
Sent from my iPhone (02)
On 17-Apr-09, at 15:48, "Pat Hayes" <phayes@xxxxxxx> wrote: (03)
>
> On Apr 14, 2009, at 3:38 PM, Ed Barkmeyer wrote:
>
>>
>>> EB>> I, for one, would prefer to see the next 5+ years spent on
>>>>> in vivo testing of knowledge engineering concepts, and on
>>>>> the development of a discipline. Think of it as the medical
>>>>> experience that will give us some knowledge of the required
>>>>> properties of your panacea.
>>>
>>> [MW] I agree. It would be a good idea to know what we are doing
>>> before doing it on a large scale.
>>>
>>> [JFS] I strongly agree. That was the point of my note on
>>> methodology,
>>> which emphasizes the distinctions as more fundamental than the
>>> particular choice of categories.
>>
>> Now that we are all in violent agreement, I would point out that
>> Amanda
>> said it first:
>>
>>> The best way to develop an upper ontology may be to let it emerge.
>>> Pursue
>>> applied ontology projects as described above, and bring in the
>>> upper (and
>>> upper-middle) as they are needed. Bring in higher level concepts as
>>> you need
>>> them to connect concepts accross domains, to model the logical
>>> behavior and
>>> other characteristics of the domain-specific concepts, to avoid
>>> redundant
>>> and oddly-placed assertions on domain concepts that can accurately
>>> be placed
>>> on shared concepts shared across the domains.
>>
>
> Indeed. I would point out that this is almost exactly the Semantic Web
> vision of how ontologies will evolve through use and re-use of
> concepts, so that a system of useful concepts with commonly accepted
> ontological content attached to them will emerge from their use by a
> community.
>
> Even more of us are in violent agreement, it seems.
>
> Pat H
>
>
>> -Ed
>>
>> --
>> Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
>> National Institute of Standards & Technology
>> Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
>> 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Tel: +1 301-975-3528
>> Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 FAX: +1 301-975-4694
>>
>> "The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
>> and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494
> 3973
> 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
> Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
> FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile
> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (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)
|