Re: [ontolog-forum] (renamed) Terms with fixed/multiple meanings

["Godfrey Rust" <godfrey.rust@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

William

 

Your point is one that has exercised me since the 1990s: but I dont believe the dividing line is so drastic. An increasing amount of data is managed through common message schemas, which - provided they are carefully developed - provide a good standard of controlled vocabulary. In the media domains in which I work - music, books, journals, libraries, audiovisual with standards - there is a very strong move in this direction and a range of established and emerging standards such as ONIX, DDEX and RDA, and other domains are further developed than we are. Data of this kind is starting to find its way into "linked open data" (using that term in a general sense, not specifically in the Semantic Web RDF sense) and I expect namespaces other than the basic dc: and foaf: to become commonplace and widely used over the next decade. Ontology has a key role in the mapping and interoperating of these schemas, and then in reasoning over the resulting data.

 

Of course, we are always at the mercy of those who create the messages to use the schemas correctly, and there will always be a non-trivial margin of error: but on the whole I think good message standards are the key as they deliver reasonable quality data which can be subjected to varying degrees of ontological processing. At Rightscom we developed the DDEX message standards using an underlying ontology, which for five years hardly anyone in the domain has even been aware of. Now there is interest in making this ontology explicit and using it as a basis for linked data.

 

So  to my mind ontolog is very much concerned with the use of ontology on data that's "out there in web-land" - the key issue is knowing (a) the namespaces (and thereby the schemas) of the terms you are processing and (b) the provenance of the data. The former seems to be gradually getting somewhere; the latter is more challenging.

 

Godfrey

 

Godfrey Rust
Chief Data Architect
Rightscom/Ontologyx
Linton House LG01
164/180 Union Street, London SE1 0LH
www.rightscom.com
Direct +20 8579 8655
Rightscom Office +20 7620 4433
Mobile 07967 963674

 

 

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

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

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

Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 5:03 PM

Subject: [ontolog-forum] (renamed) Terms with fixed/multiple meanings

> 
> John: I understand your point that a "term" in a formal 
language (e.g., ontology) should have a single, unique definition - this allows 
automated processors to (soundly) do something with statements in the 
language.
> 
> It is important to point out, however, that this 
requirement addresses a very small set of users "out there in web-land" - less 
than 1% I would guess.  The "semantic web" will never materialize with this 
requirement because, simply, a very very large percentage of data-creators don't 
have the understanding and won't devote the time/rigor required to create these 
semantically precise statements.  Most will create their schemas and 
ontologies and create their data using their natural language 
skills/capabilities/facilities - leading to multiple and evolving 
meanings.  So, realistically, except for a very small population, "terms" 
that are used to name things in web-land *will* have multiple 
meanings.   We can exclude those undisciplined cases and operate in 
our own small, rigorous, well-defined world - but how useful will that really 
be?  (Like everything in AI, it seems, it'll be useful in special cases, 
but not in general.)
> 
> As I write this, it brings the question of 
scope to my mind: in our discussions here are we ONLY interested in talking 
about formal ontologies with precisely-defined semantics that can soundly 
reasoned over, or are we talking about the "semantic web" (or "semantic 
enterprises") in general where, presumably, we can evolve to a point where 
processors can do something will all the data "out there in web-land"?
> 
> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original 
Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F. 
Sowa
> Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 4:04 PM
> To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Semantic Enterprise Architecture - 
Interoperability?
> 
> David and Doug,
> 
> DF>> a 
Semantic Web needs ontologies of terms with fixed meanings
> 
> 
DE> Is this saying that a term (word, phrase, acronym, 
abbreviation,
>> whatever) can only have a single meaning?
> 
> We must always distinguish the names of relations and instances
> 
in any formal language from the words in any natural language
> that is 
being mapped to that formal language.
> 
> DF used the word 'term' 
for the symbols in some formal language.
> Those symbols should have 
unique definitions.
> 
> DE was talking about the words used in some 
NL that is being
> mapped to the symbols of some formal language.
> 
> The names used in the formalism should never be identified
> with 
the words in the NL -- even when their spelling happens
> to be 
similar.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
_________________________________________________________________
> 
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
> 
> 
> 
______________________________________________________________________
> 
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> 
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
> 
______________________________________________________________________
>

_________________________________________________________________
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)