Duane, Jeff, Matthew,
Thank you for your responses and for clarifying the issue. (01)
Clearly there are standards that allow for dynamically altering the
ontologies. I'm wondering what the issues for Frank's use-case were
then? Perhaps it was easier to build the models from scratch rather
than using a set of standards. Especially since they were building
something that would not be made available to the outside world.
Unless part of the requirements, it can be a daunting task to abide by
standards. I think Jeff's point (3) adresses this. (02)
I will see if I can investigate this use-case further. (03)
On 30 September 2011 03:56, Matthew West <dr.matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dear Bart,
>
> His real objection is to a fixed ontology rather than a standard one, he
> needs to be able to extend the ontology and correct it as time passes, and
> his idea of a standard ontology is that you cannot do that. This of course
> is not true. For example, ISO 15926 is designed to be extensible, with a
> small fixed core that supports that extensibility, and the standards process
> allows even that to be updated (though it hasn't been yet in 8 years).
>
> Regards
>
> Matthew West
> Information Junction
> Tel: +44 1489 880185
> Mobile: +44 750 3385279
> Skype: dr.matthew.west
> matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>
> This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England
> and Wales No. 6632177.
> Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
> Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
>
>
>
>> I thought this post from Frank Carvalho was interesting as an
>> application of ontologies to keep dynamic data and metadata organized.
>>
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2011Sep/0167.html
>>
>> It's only RDF, but I find it interesting that a standard SOA ontology
>> is described as a problem. Instead each "type of metainformation has
>> its own ontology".
>>
>> Are standard/upper ontologies only practical for more expressive
>> ontology languages?
>>
>> Is this a unique domain-ontology that simply wouldn't benefit from a
>> standard/upper ontology?
>>
>> --
>> Bart Gajderowicz, MSc.
>> Ryerson University
>> http://www.scs.ryerson.ca/~bgajdero
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> (04)
--
Bart Gajderowicz, MSc.
Ryerson University
http://www.scs.ryerson.ca/~bgajdero (05)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (06)
|