Quality as in 'Zero Defects' in the Mfg industry and requirements on
supply chains for components is Jack's point, and that view of Quality
does exist in some industries. Matthew and Chris are pointing out that
some (let's call it) 'education' may be required for Mfg industry
organizations trying to apply Zero Defects to ontologies, or any other
complex software system. That said, even wrt the Mfg industry everyone
knows you don't buy a newly designed car in it's first year. The
engineers had a deadline and the car went into production whether it had
Zero Defects or not. So, that 'education' may be nothing more than
getting them to think of complex software systems as being more like
cars than like components. (01)
Cheers,
David (02)
On 12/16/2010 7:55 AM, Matthew West wrote:
> Dear Jack,
>
>
>> Let's be clear that the issue concerns the quality of something. An
> ontology
>> containing an occurrence may use a binary representation while
> representing a
>> continuance or persistence is not. However the issue is not about how
> things
>> are represented by the ontology the issue is about the utility of the
>> ontology. One aspect of reality that is binary according to W. Edwards
> Deming,
>> Phil Crosby, Juran, et al. is the attribute of quality of a thing. Others
> like
>> high quality. It may be that they speak of highly pregnant as well. So be
> it.
>
> MW: What is called for is being able to distinguish a binary situation from
> a non-binary situation. The original quality work of the distinguished
> gentlemen you mention was around the manufacture of mechanical parts for
> which a specification could be created which they either met or did not. It
> was simple. If it did not meet the spec you did not think of using it, it
> was scrap. Not everything is as simple, and certainly not software.
>
> Regards
>
> Matthew West
> Information Junction
> Tel: +44 560 302 3685
> Mobile: +44 750 3385279
> matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>
> This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England
> and Wales No. 6632177.
> Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
> Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
>
>
>
>> Jack
>>
>> On Dec 15, 2010, at 5:25 PM, Manuel Mora T. wrote:
>>
>>> Dear colleagues,
>>> Ontologies is related with Philosophy issues (so part of my real
> interest)
>>> and Philosophy is about reality (how is structured, how is
> knowledgeable,
>>> and how is tranformed)). Reality is not binary and any included concept
>>> is also not binary. Of course, any observer can define a binary
> measurement
>>> system, but a continuous ones is better. Philosophy is also on
>>> spiritual issues, in such cases, the scales are binary! --> goodness
>>> or oppositive (of course with different extent of positive or negative
>>> impacts on the system). Well, just a contribution for it,
>>> Manuel Mora
>>>
>>>
>>> Jack Ring wrote:
>>>> One more try.
>>>> Tell us, is YOUR "perfection" binary?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 15, 2010, at 3:42 PM, Christopher Menzel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 15, 2010, at 3:18 PM, Jack Ring wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> (Moved from ontology-summit)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christopher Menzel<cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> December 15, 2010 10:35:44 AM MST
>>>>>> Wrote ---
>>>>>> This just isn't relevant. Matthew provided a simple counterexample to
>>>>>> your assertion that "quality is binary": a case where there are five
>>>>>> (equally severe) bugs in a program and four are fixed is obviously an
>>>>>> improvement in quality short of perfection. Case closed; quality
>>>>>> isn't binary (unless you mean something idiosyncratic by "quality").
>>>>>> Your pointing out that you can modify the conditions of his example
>>>>>> in such a way that it is no longer a counterexample is irrelevant.
>>>>>> Suppose you claim that all the balls in the bin are red or green. If
>>>>>> Matthew reaches in and pulls out a blue one, it is no defense of your
>>>>>> claim to reach in and pull out a red or green one. ++++++++++++
>>>>>> Christopher,
>>>>>> I have reviewed Matthew's original post and do not find "(equally
>>>>>> severe)" anywhere. So I will let Matthew speak for himself and point
>>>>>> out to you that "severe" is a Highly Ambiguous term (or will
>>>>>> ambiguous suffice?)
>>>>> You're still missing the point. True, Matthew did not expressly say
>>>>> "equally severe", but he was obviously purporting to give you a
>>>>> counterexample to "quality is binary", so it is incumbent upon us as
>>>>> charitable readers to interpret his words so as to make the best sense
>>>>> of them in the context. But look, let's suppose (what is wildly
>>>>> untrue) that Matthew is so thick that he wouldn't have realized that
> in
>>>>> order for the scenario he proffered to serve as a counterexample, the
>>>>> program bugs would have to be roughly equal in severity (and of
>>>>> sufficient severity to impede the program's intended function). It is
>>>>> STILL the case that the tidied up version that I provided IS a
>>>>> counterexample and THAT — namely, that counterexamples to "quality is
>>>>> binary" exist — was the point. To alter the analogy: Suppose you
> claim
>>>>> that all the balls in the bin are red or green. And suppose Matthew,
>>>>> poor color-blind fellow, reaches in and grabs what he thinks is a blue
>>>>> ball when in fact it is green. But then suppose I reach in and pull
>>>>> out an actual blue ball. It is no defense of your claim that
>>>>> "ball-in-the-bin-colors are binary" to point out Matthew's error.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, pls be aware that "quality is binary" is not my assertion. It
>>>>>> is a report about what's going on in the real world.
>>>>> People give false/misleading/confused/incoherent reports of what's
>>>>> going on in "the real world" all the time. So what? We've simply
>>>>> stumbled into another one.
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you choose to present your view of quality in a case for use by
>>>>>> the Ontology Summit with business people then don't be surprised if
>>>>>> the audience reaction is 'just another software weenie.'
>>>>> Ah, the trusty ad hominem. Last resort of the man bereft of
> arguments.
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris Menzel
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ----------------------------------------------
>>> Manuel Mora, EngD.
>>> Full Professor and Researcher "C" Level
>>> Autonomous University of Aguascalientes
>>> Ave. Universidad 940
>>> Aguascalientes, Ags.
>>> México 20100
>>> www.uaa.mx
>>> ----------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> (03)
--
Principal Consultant
TopQuadrant, Inc.
US Phone +1 336-283-0606
UK Mobile +44 7788 561308 (04)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (05)
|