ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] UML Meta-Model and Notation

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Jim Rhyne" <jrr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:33:17 -0700
Message-id: <006901cac7ee$d9df62c0$8d9e2840$@com>

Hi David,

I'll try to explain, but please respond if you do not understand something I say.

Wikipedia is an example of a curated vocabulary. In the original model for Wikipedia, anyone could submit or edit anything. The idea was that people would collaborate and produce the best possible information about the terms. However, people sometimes disagree, and the result was chaos as edit wars erupted in some areas. Wikipedia gradually transformed into an information development model in which individuals and appointed groups are editorially responsible for content in an assigned topic area. These individuals are the "curators".

For an enterprise vocabulary, consistency and validity are important. Such vocabularies are "curated" by a group within the enterprise. This group has typically been responsible for collecting the information from subject matter experts (SMEs), testing it for consistency and validity, and then publishing it for others in the enterprise to use.

With the Semantic Web, there is the possibility of a different, less labor intensive model of curating. In this model, SMEs can directly produce information, e.g. by creating or editing a Wiki page. Semantic Web technologies like OWL-DL allow this information to be classified by the curators. It can then be republished to the Wiki, but with semantic tags that allow the users to find similar content or to follow various semantic relations.

For an example of this, visit http://biomedgt.nci.nih.gov/wiki/index.php/BGT. Notice that the term links on this page are actually produced by semantic queries embedded in the Wikitext. For more information, you can have a look at http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2009_01_22.

Thanks, Jim

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Eddy
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 1:28 PM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] UML Meta-Model and Notation

 

Jim -

 

On Mar 19, 2010, at 12:35 PM, Jim Rhyne wrote:

 

> Some of us hope that we can use a "curated

> vocabulary" approach to address it. In this approach, the SMEs and 

> reference

> users are not exposed to this kind of terminology.

 

 

Could you please to explain/expound what you mean by "curated 

vocabulary"?

 

 

I am pondering this odd phraseology through this lens:

- "real words" (the stuff found in dictionaries) have on average 10 

meanings

- "short words" (e.g. acronyms, initialisms, systems slang, 

abbreviations, etc.)  have an average of 35 meanings per term.  (e.g. 

"it" has at least 89 meanings, "cms" has 263 meanings)

 

 

Surfing "curated vocabulary" returns 415 Google hits... clearly on 

the BLEEDING edge of fashion.

 

Seeing that Kingsley Idehen is involved certainly helps establish 

useful context for me since I know a teeny bit about his work... and 

would be totally context free for the remaining 99.9999% of humanity.

 

 

From:  http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen/index.vspx?cat=21

 

> Closed Vocabulary Construction - rather than commence the futile 

> quest of building your own closed vocabulary, simply leverage 

> Wikipedia's human curated vocabulary as our common base.

 

 

This is at the opposite end of the spectrum where I'm looking for 

helping to understand how (several) systems can interoperate.  The 

vocabulary in & around systems is NOT—at least up until now—publicly 

"curated."  While "peer reviews" and "naming conventions" are long 

standing valuable activities, I don't think they're widely followed.

 

If I'm using a vocabulary, I want it to be laser focused on the system

(s) I'm wrestling with, not something from Wikipedia, where the odds 

are—AT BEST—one in 45 (10 + 35) that the meaning in my system is the 

same as what is vetted in Wikipedia.

 

___________________

David Eddy

deddy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

781-455-0949

 

 

_________________________________________________________________

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>