Dear Pat, (01)
I agree. (02)
> Perhaps the distinction between "philosophical" ontology and the
> computational implementation is somewhat analogous to the distinction
> between theoretical physics and experimental physics, but with the
> levels of abstraction moved one step higher, where computational
> ontology is similar to theoretical physics and philosophical ontology
> is at a level of abstraction one step higher than theoretical physics.
> Whether or not the analogy is at all helpful, I myself find the
> discussions of philosophical ontologists useful and think of my
> computer as a laboratory in which I can test various theories of
> ontology to see how they perform in practical tasks. An example of a
> practical task that I find intriguing is language understanding. (03)
Perhaps there is a dimension here - philosophical depth or some such.
The degree to which philosophical theories have been taken into account
in developing the ontology. (04)
Regards (05)
Matthew West
Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
Registered in England and Wales
Registered number: 621148
Registered office: Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom (06)
Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/ (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)
|