Some modifications to Leo's proposed specifications (01)
>Dimensions of Ontology Types:
>
>1) Formality: Informal (Formality = 0) vs. Formal (Formality = 1)
>2) Expressivity: Expressivity of the semantic model (i.e., underlying
>knowledge
>representation language or logic) [No scale determined yet]
>3) Concept-based: Term (Concept-based = 0) vs. concept (real world
>referent)(Concept-based = 1) (02)
I assume that the salient opposition here is whether an ontology is (03)
concept-based (the terms in the ontology refer to concepts = ideas in
the minds of experts, meanings, units of knowledge [defenders of
concept-based ontologies should specify which] (04)
reality-based (the terms in the ontology are intended to refer to
universals (types, kinds), to collections (sets, classes) of
instances, or to some combination of these two (05)
>4) Mathematical Ordering: Mathematical ordering, structure, definition
>of the privileged
>parent-child relation: [No scale determined yet] (06)
I assume that the privileged parent-child relation should be the is-a
(is a subtype / is a subconcept of) relation; I do not know what is
meant by 'mathematical ordering' (07)
>5) Application focus/use cases, etc. (part of this is precision of the
>service needed, e.g., metadata/topic terms for a document to aid in
>broad doc topic retrieval vs. a semantic service query, specfication,
>or composition): [No scale determined yet] (08)
Proposed scale: does an ontology have a plurality of independent users (09)
>6) Granularity (precision, scope): [No scale determined yet] (010)
I think granularity, precision and scope are three different things (011)
>7) Development Philosophy: Empirical (bottom-up) [0] vs. Rationalist
>(top-down) development [1]
>methodology (i.e., arbitrary folks add or annotate terms/concepts vs. a
>rigorous ontology development) [No scale determined yet; Some
>combination? Middle-out? But what does that mean?]
>8) Human-Coded: Human-coded [1] vs. machine-learned/generated [0] (012)
human coded means also: validated by experts (013)
>9) Automated reasoning (and complexity of that, i.e., one could have
>transitive closure or subsumption down a subclass graph vs.
>theorem-proving): [No scale determined yet]
>10) Descriptive vs. prescriptive (i.e., a commonsense or
>conceptually-profligate ontology vs. an ontology that specifies that
>this is the way the world is): [No scale determined yet] (014)
BS (015)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (016)
|