Dear Mike, (01)
> This is mostly true, but understates an important difference. Many of
> the ontologies that are being built today are profoundly boring and of
> no interest whatever to philosophers. So it is not true that we HAVE
> found ways to implement, test and run them, that is not the ONLY thing
> we have done. Because the purpose we are putting ontologies to, we are
> creating useful artifacts that are of no interest to most
> philosophers. (02)
Well that is their loss. Actually, I keep finding things in these apparantly
boring ontologies that really should be of interest to philosophers, and are
to a few. (03)
Regards (04)
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 (05)
Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/ (06)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (07)
|