ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] I ontologise, you ontologise, we all mess up... (was

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 14:56:26 -0800
Message-id: <20110111225635.F0E4E138D17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi Bill,

 

You wrote:

 

... An ontology is not like a chair or a car or a building that is engineered to meet specific, concrete, physical requirements, and can be measured whether or not it meets those requirements.  While I agree that training and experience can make one a better ontology designer, I don't think it's possible to completely remove individual bias from the process.

 

I emphatically disagree!  If the ontology doesn’t meet a specific set of needs, whether documented as requirements or some other documentation method, the need drives the usage.  If there are no needs, the ontology stays in the college or academy where it was originated or partnered with.  

 

Requirements, i.e. real human needs, always drive the market.  Research is nice if you're doing it, but it doesn’t satisfy the fund directors who need clear returns on their last year's budget to convince their bankers to put up another year.  

 

-Rich

 

Sincerely,

Rich Cooper

EnglishLogicKernel.com

Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2

 

-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Burkett, William [USA]
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 2:33 PM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] I ontologise, you ontologise, we all mess up... (was: Modeling a money transferring scenario, or any of a range of similar dialogues)

 

Chris, Ed:

 

I disagree that an ontology is (1) an artifact and (2) is something that can be engineered. (Thus I support Peter's question of whether "ontology engineer" is a useful term.)  It is the *representation/manifestation* of an ontology that is the artifact that is created - it's the OWL representation (or CL representation or whatever) that is the artifact.  There is also the intangible aspect of what the representation of the ontology means that not subject to engineering discipline, but rather depends more on individual interpretation and perspective.  An ontology is not like a chair or a car or a building that is engineered to meet specific, concrete, physical requirements, and can be measured whether or not it meets those requirements.  While I agree that training and experience can make one a better ontology designer, I don't think it's possible to completely remove individual bias from the process.

 

Bill

 

-----Original Message-----

From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ed Barkmeyer

Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 2:57 PM

To: [ontolog-forum]

Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] I ontologise, you ontologise, we all mess up... (was: Modeling a money transferring scenario, or any of a range of similar dialogues)

 

+1

 

I was about to write almost exactly what Chris wrote below.  An ontology

is an artifact that performs a function.  Engineers design artifacts

that perform functions.  Thus the term.

 

Peter is right that 'ontology engineers' and 'knowledge engineers' and

'computer systems analysts' may tend to inject their ideas and

misunderstandings into their artifacts.  But part of that is that

encoding knowledge involves a certain amount of understanding of that

knowledge by the knowledge engineer.  There is a fine line between

rephrasing what you think was said for the purpose of clarifying what

the expert said, and injecting your own understanding into the model. 

The related problem is the erroneous belief that your technology is

powerful enough to represent exactly the knowledge that is needed, which

causes you to dismiss what you don't know how to represent, as opposed

to wondering whether your product will be able to perform the intended

function.

 

I repeat what I said earlier about the hubris of engineers -- many

engineers think they can quickly master any related subject sufficiently

for their work, and knowledge engineers are no exception.  Like any

trade, there is a spectrum of competence, and the high end practitioners

are experienced enough to know when they are out of their depth.  (As a

journeyman software engineer working with a physicist to debug a

program, I pushed deeper and deeper into the mathematics.  At some

point, the physicist said to me, "I don't know how much nuclear magnetic

resonance I can teach you in an hour!"  Point taken!)

 

-Ed

 

"The greatest enemy of Knowledge is not Ignorance,

it is the Illusion of Knowledge."

  -- Stephen Hawking

 

 

 

 

Christopher Menzel wrote:

> On Jan 11, 2011, at 1:49 PM, Peter Brown wrote:

>  

>> ...

>> I remain baffled by the terms (and the presumed concepts behind them - which are *not* clear at all) of 'ontology engineer' and 'ontology engineering'. I do not think that one can 'engineer' an ontology any more than one can engineer a meeting: one can bring skills, methods and tools to the meeting (as Chair of a meeting for example) and can make sometimes significant progress even in ignorance of the subject of the meeting - if the purpose of the role of Chair is to help the meeting to come to some conclusion. However, once a Chair starts to pronounce on matters and get involved in the substance of a meeting, those skills and methods become overshadowed by their ignorance or partisanship.

>>    

> 

> Hello Peter,

> 

> I don't understand your analogy.  An ontology is a concrete artifact (unlike a meeting).  And, like the production of any quality artifact, the production of a good ontology requires training and  expertise.  On the face of it, anyway, "ontology engineer" seems a reasonable title for those with the appropriate training and expertise.  (Opinions vary, of course, regarding the nature and extent of such training and expertise.)

> 

> I have to say that I don't see how an ontology is in any way enough like a meeting to support your argument that, because it makes no sense to engineer a meeting, it makes no sense to engineer an ontology.

> 

> -chris

> 

> _________________________________________________________________

> 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

>  

 

--

Edward J. Barkmeyer                        Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx

National Institute of Standards & Technology

Manufacturing Systems Integration Division

100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263                Tel: +1 301-975-3528

Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263                Cel: +1 240-672-5800

 

"The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,

 and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."

 

 

_________________________________________________________________

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    (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>