On 11/6/2010 12:44 PM, Rich Cooper wrote:
> That supports my point that the individuals interpret even very common
> words differently, and therefore an ontology based on language that is
> understood differently by each subject. The probability of a monosemous
> ontology is therefore very low, IMHO. (01)
An ontology certainly needs to be based on more than the names of the
terms, in fact, more than language. Properties and rules should clarify
differences between different senses of words. (02)
Contexts should also be defined, such that different rules apply in
different contexts. (03)
-- doug (04)
=============================================================
doug foxvog doug@xxxxxxxxxx http://ProgressiveAustin.org (05)
"I speak as an American to the leaders of my own nation. The great
initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to stop it must be ours."
- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
============================================================= (06)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (07)
|