ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology development method

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 10:46:43 -0800
Message-id: <20091201184657.5599D138D58@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi Ferenc,

 

You wrote:

The key, imo, is finding a way to make the

re-negotiation of meaning in the SW quick and easy

 

Could you expound your thoughts on this issue?  How can meaning be renegotiated quickly, and who is doing the negotiation?

 

It seems that your description has to do with language games which John Sowa has mentioned before several times, but for which none of us have come up with good examples to help define, analyze or validate the language game concept.  

 

I am interested in using strongly typed objects and classes to minimize (i.e. factor) the process of substituting plausible uniquely identified things in the beginning of search, and bind them to validated objects through the And/Or/Not tree of an object designation _expression_.  

 

Your thoughts on language games and the concept of capturing and analyzing them are appreciated. 

 

-Rich

 

Sincerely,

Rich Cooper

EnglishLogicKernel.com

Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of FERENC KOVACS
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 11:34 PM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology development method

 

You may want to read this

http://coolhaus.de/art-of-controversy/

 

Regards

F

----- Original Message -----

From: "Burkett, William [USA]" <burkett_william@xxxxxxx>

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 10:03 PM

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

 

 

I'll jump on this bandwagon, too, concerning the social dimension of

ontologies and ontology development; it's an important and underserved (imo)

area of exploration.  In fact, I'll expand it by pointing out that human

languages (natural languages as well as artificial languages) are

socially-constructed mechanisms.  The meaning of languages is a kind of

"social contract" (apologies to Rousseau) that is continually being tuned,

corrected, and re-negotiated.  Data, schemas, and ontologies are all

languages of which this is true.  The key, imo, is finding a way to make the

re-negotiation of meaning in the SW quick and easy.

 

Bill

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tolk, Andreas

Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 12:45 PM

To: '[ontolog-forum] '

Subject: [ontolog-forum] Ontology development method

 

I also agree with this point of view.

Ontologies are a great way to understand such differences in

conceptualization, in particular as they are formal specifications of

conceptualizations. I like the work of Wache on how to build federations

from such different conceptual views on a problem. The two papers I normally

recommend are H. Wache, T. Vogele, U. Visser, H. Stuckenschmidt, G.

Schuster, H. Neumann, and S. Hübner, "Ontology-based Integration of

Information -- a Survey of Existing Approaches," Proceedings of the

IJCAI-Workshop Ontologies and Information Sharing, Seattle, WA: 2001, pp.

108-117 and H. Wache, "Towards Rule-Based Context Transformation in

Mediators," in Proceedings of the International Workshop on Engineering

Federated Information Systems (EFIS), 1999, pp. 107-122.

One of the main advantages of ontological approaches is that they make such

differences explicit and make them applicable to engineering solutions as

well. The mediation between viewpoints to avoid conceptual misalignments of

contributions to an overarching solution is something we see everywhere

popping up, be it service oriented architecture and model based

developments.

Best wishes

Andreas

==================== ;-)

Andreas Tolk, Ph.D.

Associate Professor

Old Dominion University

Norfolk, VA, USA

 

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Rhyne

Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 2:36 PM

To: '[ontolog-forum] '

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

 

Hi Doug,

I very much agree with your point of view. A good many of the difficulties

encountered in projects that I have consulted on are rooted in

misunderstanding

and hidden agendas. The ontology is not just a technical tool, it is also a

social

and organizational tool.

One of the challenges of this approach, however, is the need for multiple

ontologies and a way to link them semantically. The different segments of a

large enterprise will develop individual terms and phrases that they use to

communicate within the segment. In my experience, there is little hope of

getting all segments to agree on a single set of terms. But, it appears to

be

often possible to get agreement on a mapping and sharing of concepts,

provided

there is a crisp and unambiguous definition of the concepts.

There is a small amount of technical work in the area of shared ontologies

and

ontology mapping that I am familiar with. Can you and others on this forum

Suggest additional sources?

Thanks,

Jim Rhyne

Software Renovation Consulting

 

-----Original Message-----

From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug McDavid

Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 3:55 AM

To: paoladimaio10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; [ontolog-forum]

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

 

Hi Paola --

 

I'd like to pick up on your point about the social aspects of this

field.  Over the years, I have gravitated more over to the social

system aspect of enterprise, and I feel strongly that precision of

language, and understanding of language distinctions, is a critical

element of lubricating the social side of enterprise (better

understanding, disambiguation to everyone's relief, semantic boundary

objects that allow different disciplines and practices to work

together, etc.).

 

I haven't found much appetite for this kind of discussion on this

particular list.   I follow the discussions here quite closely,

because I think ontology has the potential to become an important wave

of future development of business systems.  I would probably be making

more than the occasional contribution if there were more interest in

these social aspects.  Maybe someone receiving this knows of a

discussion going on elsewhere.  I admit I haven't done due diligence

on Ning, LinkedIn, Google Groups, etc.

 

If there's any interest at all, I could be encouraged to do some

diligence, and possibly set up a discussion group on this topic.

 

Thanks for your thoughts!

 

Doug

 

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 2:27 AM, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx>

wrote:

> John

> 

>> 

>> I think that *ideology* is the main obstacle that has strangled

>> innovation in the SW.

> 

> what I noticed is that much of the thinking (setting aside the ideology

> point) is done by computer scientists

> while in my view sw challenges are not striclty CS per se

> 

> Information Management dont particularly count as scientist either,

> 

> On top of that 'social 'science is not taken into account

> 

> a bit like having a team of only civil engineers, and no architects/

> planners

> 

> while its' true that infrastructure is really really important, we would

not

> want our cities to be

> run and governed solely by plumbers and electricians

> 

> 

> 

>> 

>> If anybody whispers that JSON might be better

>> than RDF, the SW thought police immediately exile them from the empire.

> 

> do you have evidence to that effect?

> 

> 

> 

> But just compare two groups that both started at Stanford around the

same

> time:

> 

> Agreed that comparing google with protege to measure success of the latter

> does not seem fair

> its a different ball game, isnt it ?:-)

> 

> 

> 

> 

> PDM

> 

> 

> _________________________________________________________________

> 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

> 

> 

 

 

 

--

 

Doug McDavid

dougmcdavid@xxxxxxxxx

916-549-4600

 

_________________________________________________________________

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

 

 

_________________________________________________________________

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

 

 

_________________________________________________________________

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>