The following point has to be clarified: (01)
> But isn't WordNet the ontology being used... (02)
WordNet is *not* an ontology. WordNet is an important
lexical resource that is widely used for interpreting
texts in natural languages. (03)
It is true that many people have *aligned* their ontologies
with WordNet synsets. But those alignments definitely do *not*
imply that the meanings of the aligned terms are identical. (04)
The only implication is that the terms from each ontology that
have been aligned to a particular WordNet synset have some kind
of *vague* and *undefined* similarity in meaning. (05)
Please look at slides 63 ff of the following talk: (06)
http://www.jfsowa.com/talks/iss.pdf (07)
Note the telecon on Friday, where several of the people
mentioned in those slides will be talking. In the discussion
period at the end of the session, you can ask them questions
about these issues (or any others that come up in their talks): (08)
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2010_09_10 (09)
John Sowa (010)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (011)
|