Mainstream practitioners do not use ontologies, because they are oriented
towards databases and not to messages and for that purpose
they are educated to create 'data models' to design those databases.
This implies that they are educated to separate the world into a meta level and
an instance level.
Their domain is the meta level and the instances are left to 'the users'.
To some extent they create ontologies on their meta level, but those ontologies
include only high level concepts and are intended
for IT purposes, such as entity types in data models or some basic concepts,
such as in RDF/OWL.
Mainstream practitioners consider (domain) ontologies to be content on a user
level. And those domain ontologies are on purpose not
integrated into their meta level ontologies. (02)
Data models are in fact only collections of 'fill-in the blanks' templates with
predefined classifications of their content.
Mainstream practitioners have not discovered that it is possible to go beyond
fixed data structures and collections of constraining
templates, such as using a flexible language as database, such as Formal
Thus mainstream practitioners don't know how to create flexible databases, nor
how to allow users to write in a language as input
for those databases.
And many researchers are educated in the same paradigm. (03)
With kind regards,
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> John F Sowa
> Verzonden: donderdag 22 november 2012 15:02
> Aan: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Onderwerp: Re: [ontolog-forum] Webby objects
> On 11/21/2012 12:05 PM, Peter Yim wrote:
> > just so we are clear ... ONTOLOG (a.k.a. Ontolog Forum) is a community
> > of practice...
> > Therefore, we don't do standards here
> I'm *not* proposing a new standard. We already have lots of standards.
> What I am proposing is that we ask some fundamental questions. The basic
>question is "Why aren't
> practitioners using ontologies?"
> The WWW grew very rapidly without any standards. Tim B-L put together some
>good ideas in a very
> fruitful combination, and the growth curve for the WWW was exponential.
>There was no need to promote
> it -- people jumped on the bandwagon as soon as they saw it.
> Instead of promoting anything or standardizing anything, I believe we should
>be asking some soul-
> searching questions:
> 1. Why aren't mainstream IT and web sites using ontologies?
> 2. Google, Microsoft, IBM, and other major corporations are
> well aware of the SW tools, but they don't use them. Why?
> 3. What is missing from our tools, techniques, and logics?
> 4. What methods work in mainstream development?
> 5. Instead of telling mainstream developers to adopt our methods,
> perhaps we should adapt our methods to theirs. But how?
> In addition to the questions, we should also discuss ideas about new
>directions and approaches that
> might lead to answers.
> 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:
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
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)