ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] Ontology Framework Draft Statement for the Ontolog

To: Ontology Summit 2007 Forum <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Chris Welty <cawelty@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:12:20 -0400
Message-id: <46290284.7070900@xxxxxxxxx>

All,    (01)

I respect Tom for having put a stake in the ground back in the day and 
tried to come up with a definition.  It was an important milestone and 
gave use something to start with and work from.  So I apologize for 
suggesting it be "discarded", rather I mean we should move on. Most of 
us who have spent any time thinking seriously about ontologies over 
the past 15 years have found problems with the "specialization of a 
conceptualization" definition.  This group includes Leo and Mike, so 
I'm sure they only let this through knowing the community would rant 
and rail.    (02)

The main problem, as pointed out already by several people in this 
discussion, and as published *numerous times* in the years Tom was on 
hiatus from the real world of ontology research, is with 
"conceptualization".  It is a word more ambiguous than "ontology" and 
creates far more problems than it ever solved.  And Tom, since you 
acknowledged having little philosophical training, it puts you on a 
slippery slope into the realm of Conceptualism, which we probably want 
to avoid.    (03)

Also, as has already been pointed out, "specification" is NOT used in 
a manner consistent with "database" specification or "requirements" 
(or software spec, or standard spec, or anything else I can think of 
in computer science).  The specification is the result, not the thing 
you started with.  An ontology specification would be a correct usage 
of the word in the CS sense.  This is clear in the way it is used, you 
say "specification of a conceptualization" not conceptualization 
specification, because the latter doesn't seem to make sense.    (04)

Another problem with "specification of a conceptualization" is that it 
is short and sweet and everyone quotes it without referring to any 
further definition or context - even if you go on (as Tom did 
originally) about what a conceptualization is supposed to be.  So I 
don't think a fix would be to try and further define what is meant by 
conceptualization in this case, spend the time rather on what is meant 
by ontology.    (05)

So my suggestions are:    (06)

- remove Specialization of a Conceptualization.
- avoid any other tagline that can too easily be quoted out of context
- concentrate on defining ontology, not some recursively enumerable 
set of dependent terms
- I'm ok with the dimensions, I'd prefer if the discussion could focus 
on elaborating those
- I like that you have examples of things that are/aren't.
- as already suggested, remove the distinction between philosophy and 
computer science.  It doesn't help at all.    (07)

-Chris    (08)

Obrst, Leo J. wrote:
> All,
>  
> Here is our draft statement about the Ontology Framework. We invite you 
> to consider and discuss this -- now and in next week's sessions. We 
> intend this to be an inclusive characterization of what an ontology 
> is. Inclusive: meaning that we invite you to consider where you and your 
> community is with respect to these dimensions. If you have concerns or 
> issues, restatements or elaborations, please let us know now and next 
> week. This will shortly be posted on the Framework Wiki page: 
> 
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2007_FrameworksForConsideration.
> 
> 
>  
> Thanks much,
>  
> Tom Gruber, Michael Gruninger, Pat Hayes, Deborah McGuinness, Leo Obrst
>  
> _____________________________________________
> Dr. Leo Obrst       The MITRE Corporation, Information Semantics
> lobrst@xxxxxxxxx    Center for Innovative Computing & Informatics
> Voice: 703-983-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S H305
> Fax: 703-983-1379   McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA
>  
>  
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>  
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/    (09)

-- 
Dr. Christopher A. Welty                    IBM Watson Research Center
+1.914.784.7055                             19 Skyline Dr.
cawelty@xxxxxxxxx                           Hawthorne, NY 10532
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/w/welty    (010)

_________________________________________________________________
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/    (011)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>