On Dec 26, 2010, at 9:44 PM, doug foxvog wrote:
> On Thu, December 23, 2010 14:36, Christopher Menzel said:
>> ...
>> Until ontological engineers, like engineers of every other other stripe, can
>be assumed to have a well-defined baseline of knowledge and a basic technical
>skills, an endless repetition of elementary modeling errors ...
>
> Before a professional engineer of any other stripe is allowed to promote
>herself as an engineer s/he has to be certified as qualified to do so. Without
>a similar rigorous certification process, anyone could hang out a shingle as
>an "ontological engineer". (01)
Indeed, seems to me that is already happening. (02)
> Perhaps some body should design such a certification process and provide
>certificates to those who manage to pass. (03)
That is exactly what I had in mind, Doug. (04)
>> We trust every new bridge that is built to hold us up (in part) because of
>the knowledge and skill of the engineers who designed it; sound bridges that
>perform their function reliably are the norm, not the exception.
>
> Nowadays. It was different in the 19th Century, before certification was
>required. Bridges fell down. Dams collapsed. Ontologies proved F -- oh
>wait, that's today. (05)
:-) Of course, present-day failures in the US are due largely to its
:near-complete neglect of aging infrastructure in favor of its current
:grotesquely misplaced spending priorities. (06)
-chris (07)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (08)
|