[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-admin] [ontolog-forum] Ontology development method

To: Ralph Hodgson <rhodgson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Irene Polikoff <irene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "[ontolog-admin] forum" <ontolog-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Robert Coyne <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:43:11 -0800
Message-id: <af8f58ac0911121043r12429017pc36699ed80981a76@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Ralph,    (01)

We do have a non-commercial policy toward contributions to this forum
(see: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nidLMK).    (02)

Since your work have been cited (and not offered by yourself or your
staff), making a response on-list and invite the person (who asked the
initial question) to contact you for more information is ok. Offering
promotional material would be more appropriately done off-list. Hope
you can understand.    (03)

Thanks & regards.  =ppy    (04)

Peter Yim
Co-convener, ONTOLOG
--    (05)

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:00 AM, Ralph Hodgson <ralphtq@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> TopQuadrant's Ontology Development Methodology is called TopSAIL - I
> have posted two slides about the methodology on TweetPics:
> 1) TopSAIL timeline - what influenced the method - http://twitpic.com/p8oqj
> 2) TopSAIL workproduct dependencies - http://twitpic.com/p8ov2
> Ralph Hodgson
> ralphtq@xxxxxxx
> Twitter: @ralphtq, @meddera    (06)

> On Nov 12, 2009, at 8:02 AM, Jack Ring wrote:
>> Marc,
>> Suggest you investigate www.topquadrant.com and www.semanticarts.com
>> Also, be aware that an ontology for an enterprise that just produces
>> every
>> day is one thing whereas an ontology for an enterprise that learns and
>> improves continuously is quite another.
>> Jack Ring
>> OntoPilot LLC    (07)

>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <marc.l.walker@xxxxxx>
>> To: <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 4:32 AM
>> Subject: [ontolog-forum] Ontology development method
>>> Hi all,
>>> I was wondering if anyone might be able to help me by sharing some
>>> thoughts on and/or experiences of using ontological development
>>> methods. I
>>> am about to embark on the development of a business related
>>> ontology and
>>> would like to use an appropriate method to provide credibility and
>>> guidance to the development process. Also using a method would help
>>> the
>>> members of the team who are relatively new to this.
>>> The three methods I am considering are:
>>> * OTK method - On-to-Knowledge
>>> * Methontology
>>> * Ushold and King
>>> The source for each method comes from the publication by Springer -
>>> Ontological Engineering.
>>> The ontology will be developed in protégé v4 and will support
>>> software
>>> developers, vendors and the construction of enterprise knowledge
>>> bases. We
>>> also expect the ontology to evolve incrementally but I would like
>>> to have
>>> a recognised method to support the design and review activities.
>>> What would be useful would be any comments on the methods - I have
>>> not
>>> used any of the three - or suggestions to other methods to consider.
>>> Thanks in advance
>>> Rgds
>>> Marc
To Post: mailto:ontolog-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-admin/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/    (08)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>