At 12:07 AM 4/21/2007, you wrote:
>I agree: we've worked with the definition "a formal descriptions of
>terms and the relationships between them" [1] as being good enough
>to know what we talking about when we're talking about what we're
>talking about...and "good enough" should be good enough. (01)
If 'term', here, means 'linguistic expression' (or perhaps more
narrowly 'noun-phrase'), then this definition would make ontology a
branch of linguistics. Most of the ontologies with which I am working
would not satisfy this definition. (02)
If 'term' does not mean something linguistic, then I, for one, am at
a loss (and the definition, for people like me at least, would not be helpful). (03)
BS (04)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (05)
|