On 2/10/2013 3:19 PM, Сергей Мещерин wrote:
> I'm developing ontology for RFBR classifier and want to connect it to
> some well-known upper ontology that lists human knowledge domains. (01)
Many so-called ontologies should more properly be called terminologies. (02)
There are no classifications of knowledge domains that are sufficiently
precise that the definitions could be specified in logic and be used
in formal reasoning. The primary reason is that knowledge about any
field is open ended. Every innovation in any domain changes that
domain -- just look at textbooks published in 1900, 1950, and 2000. (03)
Even words like 'mathematics' and 'physics' cannot be defined formally.
Trying to specify a formal definition of 'music' would be hopeless.
Check the quotations by Louis Armstrong. (04)
Summary: A terminology of human knowledge domains might produced
by an expert lexicographer. But something called an ontology of
human knowledge domains is almost certainly the work of somebody
who knows nothing about ontology. (05)
John (06)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (07)
|