I agree this is better, John. However, I do know that I can't use this
for the typical audiences I present ontologies to. "Theories", they
think they understand because they've heard the word as referring to
scientific theories, but they don't really know what a theory is. (01)
So I start off using "concept" and tell them simultaneously that it is
a placeholder for the thing in the world, etc. Then I build up to
theories, in fact logical theories. (02)
For advanced audiences like most of the Ontolog Forum, you can get more
precise and can dispense with much pedogogy. (03)
Thanks,
Leo (04)
_____________________________________________
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 (05)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F.
Sowa
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 1:58 AM
To: Ontology Summit 2007 Forum
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit]
OntologyFrameworkDraftStatementfortheOntology Summit (06)
Bill and Leo, (07)
The matter at hand is not a philosophical question about
the word 'concept', but a practical problem about designing
computer systems. (08)
We may all have varying opinions on the subject, but one thing
is very clear: words like 'concept' and 'conceptualization'
are creating more confusion than clarification. Attempting to
define such words will involve endless debate, and we're not
going to resolve the issues before the meeting at NIST. (09)
My recommendation is to avoid using the word 'concept' and its
cognates. If anybody feels the need for it, please send me
the sentence in which it occurs, and I promise to send a much
clearer restatement that avoids the word. (010)
For example, note the following definition of 'an ontology',
which I extracted from the Merriam-Webster Third Unabridged
Dictionary: (011)
a theory concerning the kinds of entities and specifically
the kinds of abstract entities to be admitted to a language
system. (012)
This definition uses much simpler and clearer words than the
word that is being defined. The word 'concept' is definitely
not clear, and there is no need for any such word to be used
in any formal definition. (013)
John (014)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (015)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (016)
|