> they collapsed their hierarchical definitions of everything into a single
>massive ontology, while leaving other statements and rules about them in
>separate ontologies (which they call "microtheories"). (01)
Doug, (02)
What would be a better way to connect multiple ontologies? (03)
Thank you, (04)
Yefim (Jeff) (05)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of doug foxvog
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 7:01 PM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Quote for the day -- KR and KM (06)
On Wed, January 5, 2011 13:13, John F. Sowa said:
> Sjir and Ed,
>
> ...
> EB:
>> We need to get the foundational ontologies out there, so that each
>> project doesn't have to build them on the job. And we need to
>> pick and choose our targets of opportunity carefully, in order to
>> establish credibility and encourage further investment.
>
> That would be useful. But if that were sufficient, Cyc today would
> be bigger than Google. Cyc has the largest ontology on earth, and
> they have exported more of it to Open Source than anybody else has
> created. They're also doing some good work on applications. But
> after 26 years, they're just piddling along compared to more recent
> companies like Google, Facebook, etc. (07)
One problem that Cyc had is that instead of maintaining many ontologies
that others could pick and choose among, they collapsed their hierarchical
definitions of everything into a single massive ontology, while leaving
other statements and rules about them in separate ontologies (which
they call "microtheories"). (08)
Thus designers could not easily pick up ontologies on their desired
subjects, without including hundreds of thousands of terms that they
did not want to include. (09)
-- doug f (010)
> ...
> ...
> But I also believe that some current research and prototypes are
> making progress on those issues. Following is a presentation
> in which I discussed them:
>
> http://www.jfsowa.com/talks/futures.pdf
> Future directions in semantic systems
>
> The reason why knowledge acquisition is so important is that
> the middle and lower levels of the ontology grow exponentially
> faster than the upper level. No matter how big the upper level
> may be, it can only contribute a small part of the total that
> is needed for any significant application.
>
> John (011)
=============================================================
doug foxvog doug@xxxxxxxxxx http://ProgressiveAustin.org (012)
"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.
============================================================= (013)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (014)
This E-Mail has been scanned for viruses. (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)
|