Hi Pavithra,
The mention of enterprise architecture caught my attention.
The UK MOD Architecture framework (MODAF) uses a 4D approach to
specify the phases of an enterprise architecture. It’s meta-model
specifies a whole-life enterprise and phases of an enterprise. Each
architecture is associated with an enterprise-phase. This is a little more
sophisticated than the usual as-is and to-be stuff you see in most EA
frameworks and methodologies – i.e. it takes into account staged delivery
of capability. The rest of MODAF is not 4D though.
The US DoD has just released DoDAF 2.0, and its meta-model is
based on the IDEAS Group foundation ontology (which is fully 4D, b-series –
see www.ideasgroup.org/foundation).
For the sake of pragmatism, they took some short-cuts in the DoDAF 2.0
meta-model, so it looks more like a data model in places than an ontology.
However, some of the 4D principles are still there – e.g. participants
overlap processes (a 4D way of modelling participation).
The UK MOD has yet to decide whether to follow the DoD and use
IDEAS for MODAF. MODAF does have a mechanism for providing standard reference
data which is based on IDEAS, however.
I’ve seen quite a few conference papers and presentations
on EA an ontology, but none of them have yet made the leap to 4D. In fact, most
of the ontology work I’ve seen is either data modelling or taxonomy.
Cheers
--
Ian Bailey
www.modelfutures.com
www.integrated-ea.com
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pavithra
Sent: 07 February 2010 01:46
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Foundation ontology, CYC, and Mapping -4D?
|
From what I know, Ontology deals with spacial related concepts upto
3D.
However there is need to take temporal or time related concepts into
consideration. So temporal ( time) inclusion makes it 4D.
In Enterprise architecture, When developing future (to be)
architecture of businesses and systems and organization, one has to take time
interval into consideration and the I have seen 4D concepts based on
projections for future..
For example, just taking years into consideration while developing
ontology for the same object - 2012 vs 2015 etc while projecting the
solutions. Further example: In 2012 - it may be Ontology for
unman space shuttle vs 2016 - 2 people navigated space shuttle !
Hope that clarifies the 4D concept!
--- On Sat, 2/6/10, Rob Freeman <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
From: Rob Freeman <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Foundation ontology, CYC, and Mapping
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Saturday, February 6, 2010, 8:35 PM
Matthew,
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 10:13 PM, Matthew West <dr.matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
>> Matthew. You seem to be suggesting a theory capable of deriving all
>> the axiomatic set theories of maths which you call "4D
>> extensionalism". Am I right that you think it might be possible
to
>> derive all of mathematics using this theory?
>
> MW: Maths is abstract and has nothing to do with 4D which is about
> individuals.
I don't see how this gels with your statement on Feb. 3.
<<<
RF> On 1) I agree. I just don't think it is possible to find a theory
> which will map between all other theories (see my post to Pat C asking
> him to find a FO for mathematics.)
MW: It is the search for such a theory that has lead me to 4D,
extensionalism of individuals and classes, and possible worlds, as used in
ISO 15926. I am quite happy to issue the challenge to identify some other
viewpoint that cannot be mapped into or out of it
<<<
"Some other viewpoint" seems to me to include all the theories of
maths.
If you want to restrict your theory in some way which excludes maths
that's OK (although the proof for maths addresses all manipulations of
symbols, so is quite general.) But then it wouldn't address my point
to Pat C about FO.
Either way, I take it you are not contesting the impossibility of a FO?
-Rob
_________________________________________________________________
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)
|