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

[Charles D Turnitsa <CTurnits@xxxxxxx>]

I realize this is a late contribution to the conversation, however . . .

As far as a definition goes, I have lately relied on a paraphrase of some terminology that Chris Welty had in a 2003 publication - in essence it amounts to an Ontology (as a product, rather than as a pursuit) is "an artifact that represents some part of the world".

This is helpful in several ways, it is simple to understand; it does not tie itself to any confusing presupposed ideas about concepts, entities, relations, etc; and it shows that current solutions (RDF? OWL? KIF?) are not the only thing that matters.  I use this definition when presenting Leo's Ontology Spectrum, to show that a number of different approaches (based on the need for depth of meaning in the artifact) can all be "ontologies" - and most of all, that an Ontology is not definitionally an OWL document. 

Chuck

Charles Turnitsa
Project Scientist
Virginia Modeling, Analysis & Simulation Center
Old Dominion University Research Foundation
(757) 638-6315 (voice)
cturnits@xxxxxxx

_________________________________________________________________
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/    (01)