Ed, John, (01)
On Jan 4, 2011, at 5:08 PM, Ed Barkmeyer wrote:
>
>> The above is an example of an eco-system view of ontologies.
>
> After the abuse of this term in OMG and elsewhere, I don't know what an
> 'ontology eco-system' might be. So if Anders says this is one, who am I
> to argue? (02)
I dont think I use the term in the sense OMG use it. (03)
In this case it means a community of interacting organisms (organization/etc)
that use tools (signs/ontologies/models/etc.) they
own/use/manage/adopt/adapt/etc to influence themselves or other organisms or
objects. The signs/ontologies/models/etc. are related statically and/or
procedurally. The community has not been assigned a purpose from the outside
and is not under anyones sole control. (04)
On Jan 4, 2011, at 5:59 PM, John F. Sowa wrote:
> AT:
>> The above is an example of an eco-system view of ontologies.
>
> I like that phrase. Interoperability does not require a single
> universal ontology, but an ecosystem of ontologies at different levels
> of detail and with different ways of specializing that detail for
> different purposes. The ecosystem also requires systematic methods
> for relating, detecting, negotiating, and resolving any differences
> or conflicts that may arise. (05)
yes sounds about right. (06)
> AT
>> This is an interesting notion to use higher 'level' elements
>> to describe the similarities and differences in lower 'level' model.
>> Next is to look at, how many 'levels' do you have? Primitives and Domain and
>...?
>
> I would replace Pat's term 'foundation' with 'ecosystem', and I would
> support an open-ended (potentially infinite) number of "primitives",
> any of which might be refined or redefined in terms of any others. (07)
Not sure replace is the way to approach Foundation. But it could be a good and
reusable building block. (08)
> AT
>> I'm interested in looking at large scale systems or large scale
>> Eco Systems of interlinked models/MOT's.
>>
>> In this case the 'levels' usually form longer chains of
>> adaptation/derivations/transformations/interlinked MOT's.
>>
>> Most users pick up some Industry's (or CommunityOfPractice or
>> IT vendor or...) end-of-chain and then continue with bilateral
>> agreements and internal adaptations.
>
> I agree with this approach. I would recommend an open-ended
> ecosystem in which anybody's ontology (vendor, user, or researcher)
> can find a place. Then new ontologies could be formed from the
> existing ones by any kinds of agreements, adaptations, extensions,
> contractions, or modifications. (09)
Yes, an ecosystem is open ended in the sense that it not under anyones sole
control. (010)
> The basic operators in the lattice of theories can support any chain
> of revisions and combinations that relate or convert one theory to
> any other. (011)
Yes the - theory provides a good starting point for statical relationships. I
wonder though if not procedural 'relationships' also must be supported in order
to make it practicable (not sure about this point). (012)
> EB:
>> After the abuse of this term in OMG and elsewhere, I don't know what
>> an 'ontology eco-system' might be. So if Anders says this is one,
>> who am I to argue?
>
> I admit that I never understood what that term meant in OMG,
> but I like it better than Pat's term 'foundation'. Since Anders'
> view is close to my hierarchy of theories, I'm delighted to have
> a catchy new term for what I've been talking about for years. (013)
I dont think they are in opposition but rather complementary ideas.
And yes, the ecosystem view of ontologies are very much aligned with the
L-theory. (014)
/anders
Anders W. Tell (015)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (016)
|