As requested by Peter, I am reposting an email I sent him.
Chris
-----------------
Dear
Chris,
Thank
you for the message.
> [CP] I am not sure whether this is the kind
of feedback > that you want. Or where
you want it posted.
[ppy] Yes, indeed. It would be useful for you to
re-post your input to the [ontology-summit] list. Both the survey and that list
(plus, of course, the face-to-face gathering on 4/23 & 24) are the
prescribed 'channels' for input to the OntologySummit2007 discourse.
> [CP] one growing (sub?) constituency
has > been omitted from your list.
That is legacy system re-engineering. ...
[ppy] Thank you. I just added it under the
"Applications Development, Software Engineering and Information Model
communities" (ref:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2007_DefinitionsOfOntology#nidTJT
)
... hope that is acceptable to you.
Thanks
& regards. =ppy
--
Chris
Partridge wrote Wed, 28 Mar 2007 20:59:39 +0100:
>
Dear Peter,
>
>
I am not sure whether this is the kind of feedback that you want. Or
>
where you want it posted.
>
>
I had a look at the page where descriptions of what an ontology is -
>
see below.
>
>
What concerns me about this, is that it ignores a tradition in both
>
philosophy and business systems - of regarding the
ontology as what
>
exists in the real world and the ontology model as what describes it.
>
>
I put the definition I personally use in my submission - Lowe's - an
>
ontology is “the set of things whose existence
is acknowledged by a
> particular theory or system of thought.”
(E. J. Lowe, The Oxford
> Companion to Philosophy).
I choose this as I think it has a good
>
pedigree. But I
also think this corresponds to the gut feel of a
>
large proportion of the practioners
building and working with business
>
systems. They assume that there are things in the
world (a realist
>
view) and they start their work by trying to build a model (in the
> engineering sense) of these.
This view permeates the literature. The
>
earliest instance of the use of the term ontology
(Mealy) uses it this
>
way. Bill Kent's book Data and Reality uses it this
way. And Matthew
>
West's early work on High Quality Data Models fits into this stream
>
(as I am sure he will testify)
>
>
As such I think this weight of opinion deserves some recognition,
>
though I accept that many academic AI researchers want
to use a
>
Gruber-like definition which ends with conceptualisation and never
> reaches the real world.
>
>
While this may look like an argument about words, I think there is
>
something a little more substantial to it. If one
subscribes to a
>
realist view, then questions of interoperability often
ultimately turn
>
on agreeing what in the real world (i.e. ontology) is
being modelled.
>
If you take the real world out of the equation, then interoperability gets more
difficult to deal with.
>
>
On a second point, it seems to me that one growing (sub?) constituency
>
has been omitted from your list. That is legacy system re-engineering.
>
I am not sure quite where this fits in. This deals with the recapture
>
of the business knowledge in existing systems
typically for re-development or integration.
>
Given that the majority of IT spend is currently on existing system -
>
I think this area deserves some consideration. I seem to recall some
>
mails on the list some time ago that noted its
importance.
>
>
I appreciate that both these point boil down to noting that my survey
>
input has not found its way onto the site yet.
>
>
Best regards,
>
Chris
>
>
>
Extract from webpage*******************************1
>
Ontologies are standard methods for the interpretion of information.
> An ontology
covers presentation, code writing, and processing. All
>
ontologies together could be
imagined in a pyramid, where the upper,
>
governing, ontologies are broad and nearly constant. Ontologies geared
>
to specific types of information have more variables,
serving as templates for specific
>
types of projects. [posted by
DeborahMacPherson / 2007.02.01] (TF4)
>
>
"What is an Ontology?" - "An ontology
is a specification of a
>
conceptualization." ... "Ontologies
as a specification mechanism" ...
>
(from "A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications" TomGruber /
>
1993) [posted by PeterYim / 2007.01.18] (T1I)
>
"What is an Ontology?" by LeoObrst - Ontolog invited Speaker -
>
ConferenceCall_2006_01_12 [posted by PeterYim /
2007.01.18] (T1J)
>
wikipedia - WikiPedia:Ontology & Ontology (computer science)
[posted by
>
PeterYim / 2007.01.18] (T1K)
>
from MichaelUschold - 2
slides on "Kinds of Ontology" - excerpt from
>
his keynote presentation at the 9th International
Protégé Conference (July 2006,
> Stanford,
CA.)
[posted by PeterYim /
2007.01.18] (T1L)
>
An ontology is a 'set of agreed terms of references' that define a
>
given knowledge domain and its established boundaries, and includes
> abstractions, representations,
formalisations, transformations and
> implementations'. It
is also a 'conceptual and semantic model of reality' developed to provide view
>
of the world. [posted by PaolaDiMaio / 2007.02.08]
(TLZ)
>
>
Extract from webpage*******************************2
>
Applications Development, Software Engineering and Information Model
>
communities
(TJT)
>
software engineering / developers / programmers
community (TJW)
>
database community
(TJU)
>
UML community (
>>
-----Original Message-----
>>
From: peter.yim@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:peter.yim@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of
>>
Peter Yim
>>
Sent: 27 March 2007 22:58
>>
To: Chris Partridge
>>
Cc: Peter P. Yim
>>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [ontology-summit] Ontology Summit 2007 -
>>
Survey deadline extended to 2007.03.27]
>>
>>
Dear Chris,
>>
>>
I did get your earlier survey input. My
earlier message was done to
>>
cluster a subset of the participants into constituencies to
>>
facilitate the next step -- the discussion to help clarify how issues
>>
relating to particular constituencies or communities. Of course, it
>>
also served as a reminder to people to tuen in their survey input if
>>
they haven't already done so (which did not apply to
you.)
>>
>>
Thank you, again for your support and for sharing with us your
>>
expertise and insight.
>>
>>
Best regards. =ppy
>>
--
>>
>>
>>
On 3/27/07, Chris Partridge <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
Hi Peter,
>>>
>>>
I'm not sure I understand what you are requesting - and I would
>>>
like to help.
>>>
>>>
Is the point that you want us/me to complete the survey? I thought I
>>>
had done so. If my input did not make it into the system, then I
>>>
will do
>>
this
>>>
again.
>>>
>>>
If not, then let me know what I can do.
>>>
>>>
Regards
>>>
Chris
>>>
>>>>
-----Original Message-----
>>>>
From: Peter P. Yim [mailto:peter.yim@xxxxxxxx]
>>>>
Sent: 27 March 2007 17:17
>>>>
To: West, Matthew R SIPC-DFD/321; Adrian Walker; Chris Partridge;
>>
Susie
>>>>
Stephens; Tatiana Malyuta; Bill Andersen; Ralph; Holger Knublauch;
>>
Timothy
>>>>
Redmond; Tania Tudorache; Asuman
Dogac; "Atilla Elçi (DAÜ)"; Ed
>>
Barkmeyer;
>>>>
Martin O'Connor; Elisa F. Kendall; Michael Daconta; Melliyal
>>
Annamalai;
>>>>
Leo Obrst; John F. Sowa
>>>>
Cc: Ontology Summit 2007 Organizing Committee
>>>>
Subject: [Fwd: Re: [ontology-summit] Ontology Summit 2007 - Survey
>>>>
deadline extended to 2007.03.27]
>>>>
>>>>
Dear Adrian, Asuman, Attila, Bill, Chris, Ed, Elisa, Holger, John,
>>>>
Leo, Martin, Melli, Mike, Ralph, Susie, Tania, Tatiana,
Tim &
>>>>
Matthew,
>>>>
>>>>
I am forwarding you this message in the hope that we can get your
>>>>
expert input into our collected survey results before
we close the
>>>>
survey (on Tue Mar-27, quite possible 'today' by the
time you read
>>>> this!).
Kindly spend a bit of time on the survey now, if you can,
>>>>
for the sake of the broader community (if you haven't
already
>>>>
responded earlier.)
>>>>
>>>>
See the attached for the covering message - link to the survey is
>>>>
in the message too.
>>>>
>>>>
In particular, please focus on supply input on Q3 (Ontology -
>>>>
value, issues, problems & solutions) and Q4 (terms and artifacts)
>>>>
from the perspective of database and enterprise
applications (plus
>>>>
any other vantage point from which you might want to
provide
>>>> input.)
>>>>
>>>>
Thanks & regards. =ppy
>>>>
--
>>>>