ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] What goes into a Lexicon?

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 10:31:36 -0800
Message-id: <CC1476D80D04440C8634CFD7CA888A9E@Gateway>

Dear Leo and David,

 

David wrote:

If grunts are working away with their local vocabularies/jargon/local opaque language (& VERY unlikely to be aware of the ontology in the background), what is the value add of the ontology?

Leo wrote:

Without an ontology, there is no representation of what those vocabulary terms mean, except in some documentation (data dictionaries, etc.) that humans have to read in order to interpret. There is no machine semantic interpretation.  If I give you a database column name such as AAV12, for example, what does it mean? You have to either know it or look it up. The words and phrases you use are only “meaningful” because you have complex representations (concepts? ontologies?) in your mind as a human.

If the ontology is in said grunt’s mind, then why should the said grunt spend a lot of well paid hours learning some abstract ontology that is NOT in said grunt’s mind?  I don’t see a value there. 

 

My experience in software development in teams is that the vocabulary used is absolutely essential to the two programmers discussing their current issue of interfacing with each other.  Whether other programmers use the same word or not isn’t significant to them; they are not writing programs to be readable until possibly after the said programs actually work.  So the problem is already solved before any ontology is used, dictated, or agreed to.  Then there’s time to adjust words to fit some manager’s choice of vocabulary, but that is AFTER the problem of a working program has already been solved. 

 

So how does an ontology with stipulated vocabulary help solve the problem in the first place?  I agree that a debated and consensus vocabulary makes the future maintenance task a bit easier, but is it actually worth the added cost of developing?  Again, I don’t see the problem being made simpler, being solved faster, or being developed less expensively by ontologies.  I am willing to listen to examples that might prove me wrong on that, but so far I have not heard even one that is larger than Dublin Core. 

 

-Rich

 

Sincerely,

Rich Cooper

EnglishLogicKernel.com

Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

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


From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Obrst, Leo J.
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 10:14 AM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] What goes into a Lexicon?

 

Just having vocabularies ensures that humans must always be in the interpretation loop, not just at development time, but at all runtimes. Without an ontology, there is no representation of what those vocabulary terms mean, except in some documentation (data dictionaries, etc.) that humans have to read in order to interpret. There is no machine semantic interpretation.  If I give you a database column name such as AAV12, for example, what does it mean? You have to either know it or look it up. The words and phrases you use are only “meaningful” because you have complex representations (concepts? ontologies?) in your mind as a human.

 

Thanks,

Leo

 

From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Eddy
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 11:43 AM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] What goes into a Lexicons

 

Leo -

 

On Feb 29, 2012, at 9:09 AM, Obrst, Leo J. wrote:

 

Almost every “view” or “context” has two components: 1) the ontology view, i.e., the projection of a subset of classes, properties, axioms, etc., from the ontology, to satisfy a specific application need, and 2) the vocabulary to be associated with the elements of the ontology view.

 

I think I agree.

 

So what's the purpose/value/utility of the ontology view?

 

If grunts are working away with their local vocabularies/jargon/local opaque language (& VERY unlikely to be aware of the ontology in the background), what is the value add of the ontology?

 

___________________

David Eddy

 

781-455-0949

 


_________________________________________________________________
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>