ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] Defining "ontology"

To: <ray@xxxxxxxx>, "'Ontology Summit 2007 Forum'" <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Mustafa Jarrar" <mjarrar@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:01:59 +0100
Message-id: <007101c73bfc$4c413e10$0301a8c0@starpc30>
Steve, all    (01)

I agree that "quality" should not be a direct goal for an ontology definition.
However, in my opinion classifying ontology definitions should lead to a 
methodological principle. For example, suppose we
classify ontologies into three types (Upper-Level <- domain <- application). 
One can see from this classification that each
vocabulary in an application ontology should be defined/linked with a 
vocabulary in a domain ontology, and each vocabulary in a
domain ontology should be defined/linked with a vocabulary in a foundational 
ontology, etc. In this way, we encourage reusability,
improve quality, etc. 
In other words, we need more than a "definition" of what an ontology is. This 
definition/classification should bring a new thing
to the community, hopefully a methodology that we all can agree on.    (02)

In addition, I believe that the specification language (or even the formality 
level) of an ontology is irrelevant here. The
important issue, in my opinion, is whether a specification (/ontology) is aimed 
with the characterizing the meaning of its
vocabulary.    (03)

Things like a data model, XML schema, or a knowledge base (that do not 
axiomatize a domain/meaning) will not be called ontology.
For example, do you call the Dublin Core Metadata elements an ontology? I 
don't, even the whole words share and use. It is a
meta-model/data schema.    (04)

Best Regards,
-Mustafa    (05)


============================================
Dr.Mustafa Jarrar
  Senior researcher
  STARLab, Vrije Universiteit Brussel
  mjarrar@xxxxxxxxx | mustafa@xxxxxxxxxxx
  http://www.starlab.vub.ac.be/staff/mustafa
  Tel: +32 2 6293487 , Fax :+32 2 6293819
  Mobile: +32 495 687077 Skype:mjarrar
============================================     (06)



  >-----Original Message-----
  >From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
  >Behalf Of Steve Ray
  >Sent: 19 January 2007 03:29
  >To: 'Ontology Summit 2007 Forum'
  >Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Defining "ontology"
  >
  >I would remind everyone that we are not trying to judge the quality or
  >usefulness of the ontology - we're trying to categorize what "kind" of 
ontology
  >something is. Thus, I would disagree with any of these suggested dimensions.
  >
  >(Having said that, the NCOR Ontology Evaluation Committee welcomes such
  >suggestions)
  >
  >-----Original Message-----
  >From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  >[mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
  >matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
  >Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 9:24 AM
  >To: patrick@xxxxxxxxxxx; ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  >Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Defining "ontology"
  >
  >Dear Patrick,
  >
  >I agree that a simple linear scale is not appropriate. One of the questions I
  >have is what other dimensions are there?
  >
  >How about:
  >- number of objects in the ontology
  >- number of users of the ontology
  >- intended and actual types of usage
  >
  >as a few that might be relevant.
  >
  >
  >Regards
  >
  >Matthew West
  >Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager Shell International 
Petroleum
  >Company Limited Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
  >
  >Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
  >Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
  >http://www.shell.com
  >http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
  >
  >
  >> -----Original Message-----
  >> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  >> [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Patrick
  >> Durusau
  >> Sent: 19 January 2007 13:54
  >> To: Ontology Summit 2007 Forum
  >> Subject: [ontology-summit] Defining "ontology"
  >>
  >>
  >> Greetings,
  >>
  >> I am concerned with the suggestions that it is possible to create a
  >> continuum along which to organize what are known as "ontologies" in
  >> one or more circles.
  >>
  >> At least unless we are willing to concede that the creation of such a
  >> continuum is itself an imposition of assumptions from an undisclosed
  >> ontology.
  >>
  >> I am sure there are those who would say that folksonomies are
  >> "missing"
  >> features that are present in "formal" ontologies. Perhaps, but
  >> folksonomies predate "formal" ontologies by several millenia and have
  >> proven robust enough for many purposes. If the goal is to represent
  >> the opinions of the many rather than the few, perhaps it is "formal"
  >> ontologies that "missing" features.
  >>
  >> I am not taking a position one way or the other. But, I do think it is
  >> important to realize that any attempt to construct a continuum is with
  >> an unstated choice of a winner before the the continuum is populated.
  >>
  >> Hope everyone is looking forward to a great weekend!
  >>
  >> Patrick
  >>
  >> --
  >> Patrick Durusau
  >> Patrick@xxxxxxxxxxx
  >> Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
  >> Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model Member, Text
  >> Encoding Initiative Board of Directors, 2003-2005
  >>
  >> Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!
  >>
  >>
  >>
  >> _________________________________________________________________
  >> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
  >> Subscribe/Config:
  >http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
  >Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  >Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2007/
  >Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2007
  >Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
  >
  >
  >
  >_________________________________________________________________
  >Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
  >Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
  >Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  >Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2007/
  >Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2007
  >Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
  >
  >
  >_________________________________________________________________
  >Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
  >Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
  >Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  >Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2007/
  >Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2007
  >Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/    (07)


_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/ 
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2007/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2007
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/    (08)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>