ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology Project Organization:

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Matthew West <dr.matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 15:39:09 +0100
Message-id: <4a0adbc5.1438560a.4b1b.44e0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Dear Ron,    (01)

The two are not inconsistent. With URL masking you can make one URL map to
another.
Try:
http://homepages.rya-online.net/matthew-west/ 
and
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/     (02)

The latter points to the former.    (03)

Regards    (04)

Matthew West                            
Information  Junction
Tel: +44 560 302 3685
Mobile: +44 750 3385279
matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/    (05)

This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England
and Wales No. 6632177.
Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.    (06)




> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ron Wheeler
> Sent: 13 May 2009 15:11
> To: [ontolog-forum]
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology Project Organization:
> 
> Why not just start it here.
> The web site exists. It is easy to use (relatively). and Peter seems to
> be pretty generous in the use of the space.
> 
> Ron
> 
> John F. Sowa wrote:
> > Ali and Azamat,
> >
> > AH> Just for posterity -- I don't mean to deprecate the idea of
> >  > foundation ontologies. They are very useful. My intuition is
> >  > just highly sceptical that a (useful / expressive) unique one
> >  > exists. By all means though, in the spirit of scientific
> >  > discovery people ought to investigate it.
> >
> > I share your concerns.  Any ontology with detailed axioms will
> > be incompatible with many legitimate uses that require different
> > axioms for one application or another.  For example, if we put
> > all the well established laws of physics into one giant theory,
> > it would be inconsistent with every branch of engineering, since
> > they all make different approximations for different purposes.
> >
> > On the other hand, if you took the common generalization of
> > all those engineering applications, you would have a theory
> > that contained very few axioms.  It would be little more
> > than a systematic terminology plus the various relationships
> > among units of measure for all the physical quantities.  Yet
> > that generalization could be very useful for many purposes.
> >
> > For those reasons, I believe that the common generalization
> > of all the foundation ontologies will have very few axioms.
> > It will primarily consist of type-subtype and part-whole
> > relations that are true by definition.  Immediately below
> > that level will be several branches for different kinds of
> > specializations.  One of the branches would be "pure" physics,
> > which would be too precise and too detailed for most practical
> > applications.  Other branches would contain any systems of
> > conventions and approximations that anyone might find useful.
> >
> > AA> Indeed, for last two decades there have been developed
> >  > high-class ontology content, both upper levels and domain
> >  > ontologies, standing in a pressing need of an integrative
> >  > framework.  A minus, hope insignificant, a good willing
> >  > of all the upper ontology content holders and the project
> >  > leaders: CYC, OBO Foundry, DOLCE, West' ISO 15926, NeOn, etc;
> >
> > Please drop the word 'minus'.  Any consistent ontology that
> > anyone has ever found useful for any purpose should be in the
> > hierarchy.  Many talented people have contributed to those
> > efforts, and their products are being used.
> >
> > Remember that IBM beat Univac primarily because IBM supported
> > a smooth migration path from punch-card methods to modern computers.
> > Any repository for ontologies must accommodate *all* useful versions.
> > It must also show migration paths (generalizations, specializations,
> > and lateral variations) from one useful theory to another by means
> > of the common core.
> >
> > AA> To define the strategic goal of the Project: standard
> >  > ontology framework?  unified modeling framework?  ontology
> >  > and semantic standards?  semantic interoperability?  open
> >  > ontology library?
> >
> > All of those are legitimate uses, and they should be supported.
> > The core of the hierarchy should be open and free, but it should
> > contain links to proprietary ontologies of any kind.
> >
> > AA> To establish a legal entity: International Group (Body, Panel)
> >  > for Ontology and Semantic Standards (IGOSS) or (IBOSS), including
> >  > members, corporate and individual, from USA, EU, and Russia.
> >
> > Something like that will be necessary.  But if you bring the
> > big boys in too soon, they will take it over and appoint a
> > committee of their own "experts" to manage it.
> >
> > AA> To establish a special web portal, like wisely done by the
> >  > OBO Foundry. I am ready to share a domain taken:
> >  >
> >  >    http://www.standardontology.org
> >
> > That is certainly a good domain name.
> >
> > Since this idea has been developed through ontolog forum, we should
> > continue our association with ontolog forum and continue discussions
> > here. Peter Yim and others have done a lot of hard work to establish
> > this forum and the related activities.  That is a great advantage.
> >
> > But I agree that hosting the results of the efforts on a web site
> > with the name standardontology.org would be a very big plus.  It
> > would also be useful to establish a non-profit organization with
> > the same (or similar name) that could accept nontaxable donations.
> >
> > But it is also important to get some useful technical material
> > to post on the web site before bringing in large numbers of
> > members -- especially corporate members.
> >
> > 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
>     (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>