ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Semantic Enterprise Architecture -Interoperability?

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 14:57:14 -0700
Message-id: <20100908215721.0FBA1138CC2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
David,     (01)

I think he is referring to something like unique synsets, which have a
single meaning, but which can have multiple word instantiations, a la
WordNet.  That arrow runs from the single meaning (synset) toward the
{words}, not the other way around.  Reverse that arrow and you have the
single interpretation that can be actually emulated; at the other end, you
have words that point to several synsets which may alternatively interpret
them, so the direction of the arrow is the critical concept I think.      (02)

So the enterprise architecture database should have columns that are unique
synsets (in effect) of enterprise meaning.  Each synset could have one row
for every word that instantiates it, perhaps one row for every word that can
be interpreted with that synset as interpretant.      (03)

Which brings up the problem of representing multiple interpreters.  Would
each synset have one set of interpretant rows for each interpreter?  It
seems like the only conclusion unless you want everyone in the enterprise to
use words the same way (unlikely to be successful).      (04)

-Rich    (05)

Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2    (06)

-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Eddy
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 2:24 PM
To: doug@xxxxxxxxxx; [ontolog-forum] 
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Semantic Enterprise Architecture
-Interoperability?    (07)

Doug -    (08)

On Sep 8, 2010, at 5:12 PM, doug foxvog wrote:    (09)

> a Semantic Web needs ontologies of terms with fixed meanings    (010)

Is this saying that a term (word, phrase, acronym, abbreviation,  
whatever) can only have a single meaning?    (011)

What did I miss here?    (012)


As I have observed before & will undoubtedly observe again...    (013)

George Miller's "Ambiguous Words"   http://www.kurzweilai.net/ 
ambiguous-words    offers an average of 10 meanings per (real) word.    (014)

My dictionary of largely acronyms (but where's the line between  
acronym & real word... I don't have a clue) finds some 34 meanings  
per term/word.  Whittling that down to 1 meaning per term is going to  
be tough.    (015)

___________________
David Eddy
deddy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx    (016)

781-455-0949    (017)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (018)



_________________________________________________________________
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    (019)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>