To: | edbark@xxxxxxxx, "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | matthew lange <mclange@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Fri, 4 Jan 2013 14:09:45 -0800 |
Message-id: | <CAKJtittAJQ0x8PSwdnNaJ+fRz7qVdUkgAOquDd+CjD5s5jAYuQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
<snip> I am not going to be concerned about carefully specifying the technical characteristics of my gearing system if I have to start by explaining what a transmission is. </snip> Clearly it all depends on the intended audience. I frequently find myself needing to define what an ontology is, in order for fellow food scientists to understand why they should be interested in having them. I also need to define reasoner. Only after defining these terms, can I launch into technical aspects about my "gearing system".
Note that mathematical formalisms for this audience only muddy the water... If your only intended audience is gearheads, then stick to the formalisms, I guess. ~mc
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Ed Barkmeyer <edbark@xxxxxxxx> 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] Simplifying the language and tools for teaching and using ontology, William Frank |
---|---|
Next by Date: | [ontolog-forum] Evaluating Knowledge Representation (KR), Proper Naming, Edmon Begoli |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Intensional relation, Ed Barkmeyer |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Intensional relation, William Frank |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |