From the chat session of
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2008_04_10 (01)
> JohnGraybeal: For MichaelGruninger: On slide 17, is it really the Design
> Methodology that you care about, or the validation/review characteristics of
> the result? The important thing would seem to be whether an ontology has
> been established as consistent or conformant along various axes,
> not how it got to that state. (1DPO)
><http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2008_04_10#nid1DPO> (02)
Validation is indeed part of the design methodology (although this should be
emphasized), but the methodology is also related to design rationale --
why is a particular concept included or axiomatized in a particular way?
This is important to know if we want to determine how much of an ontology
can be shared. (03)
- michael (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/OntologySummit2008/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2008
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/ (05)
|