John's description of how the pros
behave
But the pros
are really the pros. They have the last word.
seems fairly accurate. As a result of their elitism and
preference to
keep things complicated in computer science for the past 40 years
we have had a widening swath of death, destruction, ignorance,
agony.
waste, criminality, and dangers to the security of nations.
Ed Lowry
http://users.rcn.com/eslowry
On 7/19/2015 7:33 AM, John F Sowa wrote:
On 7/19/2015 2:11 AM, Ravi Sharma wrote:
What are the gains from developing or using ontology tools/solutions?
In *every* branch of science, engineering, medicine, law, etc.,
the work by professionals in that field is the *gold standard*.
Ontology specialists have some useful tools. And they have some
methodologies that may be useful for analyzing and organizing
the data that the professionals produce.
In any field, talented newcomers -- e.g., ontologists -- might
discover some issues that the professionals overlooked. If the
new tools and techniques are really good, the professionals may
be sufficiently impressed that they'll adopt them. But the pros
are really the pros. They have the last word.
Do they not put existing (verified independently) scientific
theories and models (Content) in different light, e.g. better
than relational data models / views of scientific data contents?
An independent review by any outsiders (including ontologists)
can be helpful, if the outsiders are truly helpful. But the
outsiders have to recognize that they are outsiders. If a bunch
of amateurs try to tell the pros how to do their job, they'll
create far more heat than light.
John
_________________________________________________________________
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