|From:||Ali Hashemi <ali@xxxxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Fri, 22 Apr 2011 15:57:20 -0400|
Just a quick response to one point.|
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 3:43 PM, John F. Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I believe the intent of this statement has been misinterpreted, I should have been clearer.
Cost in this context means that changing and admitting a novel core ontology should not be a trivial procedure. Of course everyone is free to articulate whatever they wish.When such a representation is at odds with the canon and represents a significant deviation from it - then it's addition to the shared computational conceptualization should be well justified.
I believe this mirrors current practice in terms of the admission of a novel interpretation within a field.
_________________________________________________________________ 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 (01)
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: [ontolog-forum] Relating and Reconciling Ontologies, John F. Sowa|
|Next by Date:||Re: [ontolog-forum] Relating and Reconciling Ontologies, Jack Park|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: [ontolog-forum] Relating and Reconciling Ontologies, John F. Sowa|
|Next by Thread:||Re: [ontolog-forum] Relating and Reconciling Ontologies, Ron Wheeler|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|