ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] Defining "ontology"

To: <ray@xxxxxxxx>, "Ontology Summit 2007 Forum" <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Uschold, Michael F" <michael.f.uschold@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 10:46:46 -0800
Message-id: <4301AFA5A72736428DA388B73676A38105386721@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Here Here!!!    (01)

I believe it is futile to try and come up with one true definition that 
attempts to be both crisp and normative.  Even the authors of such a definition 
would probably want to change it two years later...    (02)

It is very useful to be clear about what you mean when you use a term, to avoid 
misunderstanding.    (03)

Mike    (04)



==========================
Michael Uschold
M&CT, Phantom Works 
425 373-2845
michael.f.uschold@xxxxxxxxxx  
==========================    (05)

----------------------------------------------------
COOL TIP: to skip the phone menu tree and get a human on the phone, go to: 
http://gethuman.com/tips.html     (06)



-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Ray [mailto:ray@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 8:43 AM
To: 'Ontology Summit 2007 Forum'
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Defining "ontology"    (07)

This has been very interesting, but I must point out that the original goal was 
not to come up with a definition of ontology.    (08)

We were trying to come up with a categorization scheme into which we could 
place everything that anyone calls an ontology, whether it is computer 
processable or not, consistent or not, correct or not.    (09)

As part of such a categorization scheme, I agree that it is useful to have good 
definitions to distinguish things on this spectrum, and the current discussion 
is addressing that for things at one end of the spectrum. We might well come up 
with a definition that this community agrees is a "true ontology", but the 
point is that lots of people are using the word in ways that we may or may not 
agree with. Rather than simply insisting that they are wrong, I believe it is 
more productive to clarify how these various animals are different.    (010)



-----Original Message-----
From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Uschold, Michael 
F
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 11:21 AM
To: Ontology Summit 2007 Forum
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Defining "ontology"    (011)

The group will have to decide whether it wants its definition to be
1) normative, and there hope expect that everyone else will follow and use this 
definition.  -or-
2) descriptive, which is to say merely reflects the ways that the term I used 
today.
3) a third way?    (012)

I have always believed that 1) is unachievable, people will always disagree. 
The more crisp the definition it, the more disagreement there is.
2) results in many different definitions whose common core amounts to:
  * has a set of terms reflecting concepts of interest in some domain -and-
  * has some degree of specification of the meaning of the terms    (013)

Every single thing I ever heard called an ontology has these two things (though 
sometimes the specification of meaning is thin or just implicit). What is 
different about the things people call ontologies are the various dimensions 
that have been mentioned here.  Degree of formality, amount of meaning 
specified, how meaning is specified, what the ontology is used for etc.    (014)

http://protege.stanford.edu/conference/2006/submissions/slides/1.2_Uschold.pdf    (015)

I believe a more constructive approach will be to
1) accurately reflect the reality of the different ways that the term 'ontology'
is used. and then
2) choose a meaning that this group likes, and call it our own.     (016)

See part 1 of my Protégé keynote for a summary of these ideas reflecting my 
latest thoughts on the matter.
==========================
Michael Uschold
M&CT, Phantom Works
425 373-2845
michael.f.uschold@xxxxxxxxxx
==========================    (017)


_________________________________________________________________
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/    (018)

_________________________________________________________________
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/    (019)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>