To: | "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | Amanda Vizedom <amanda.vizedom@xxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Sat, 28 Apr 2012 17:16:17 -0400 |
Message-id: | <CAEmngXvO3u2iFOCddDfN-hXOWiE3ykxRq=wDXav2esAkQjWVBA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
I agree with you that the noun-centric approach is an error. I haven't experienced it as a general computer science approach though. I really didn't see it in action when I working as an ontologist in organizations or projects that were focused on, or grew out of, AI, NLP, simulation, or broad-scope IR. I really began to see it more recently as (1) OWL became more popular and (2) More projects started up that use ontology but had no very experienced ontologists involved at the technical, ground level. I think that OWL and/or the most popular training materials for it, tend to exacerbate this kind of error. In these project where methodology is established without an experienced hand to guide, people will often grab onto something like parts of speech that is familiar, but not actually a good proxy for ontological significance.
Amanda
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 16:31, William Frank <williamf.frank@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
_________________________________________________________________ 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) |
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology of Commands, William Frank |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology of Commands, Obrst, Leo J. |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology of Commands, William Frank |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology of Commands, William Frank |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |