That's an interesting topic and discussion.
Still i have a feeling of deprecating the kingship of science making the
conceptual core of philosophy, science, technology, and engineering.
Let's remember that Ontology is created by great minds with a single view to
put the whole world (universe) in the human mind/computing machine, like the
genie in a bottle.
Some comments below.
Julita Bermejo-Alonso:
"...but at the time the first question was: what is an ontology?"
Indeed, it could be of use to first define the nature and scope of ontology
before diving into the fun of its future; namely,
if it is about the world of things, as the Future Internet of things or Web
of entities;
the domain of concepts and ideas and reasoning;
the vocabularies, terminologies, and taxonomies,
the realm of machine languages, the syntax (symbols, codes, algorithms,
rules) and mechanical semantics. Or, ALL TOGETHER.
It is said, repeating is the mother (or father?) of learning:
(Computing) ontology is a formal representation of reality to formulate
computable models, causal algorithms, and reasoning strategies about the
world.
1. Ontology is a general account of reality, its entities and relationships,
concerning with all the major kinds of things making up the structure of the
world, reality, universe, or existence.
2. As an IT/CS ontology, it is about how the world and its domains can be
mapped to the coded representations and symbolic structures in machines.
3. In computing applications and knowledge technology, ontology forms the
world representation and reasoning semantic framework for knowledge
technology: Internet-based software tools, artificial cognitive systems,
and
intelligent agents. The computing ontology is the advanced knowledge tools
for entity-centric organization of knowledge (information or data) and for
providing the general mechanisms of reasoning over data (strategic rules).
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/2007-04/msg00135.html (01)
Julita Bermejo-Alonso: "People are not used to deal with concepts,
relations, attributes and axioms. It is too abstract to grasp."
This reminds the situation when the Philosophy Master (seemingly,
Ontologist) opened eyes to Monsieur Jourdain, who had spoken prose all his
life and never knew about this.
And some principal additions to what Jeff Schiffel suggested as an
Ontologist Body of Knowledge: Study, Research, and Working Experience in
philosophical ontology, semiotics, fundamental mathematics, epistemology,
logic (material and formal), and trans-disciplinary science and methodology,
as general models, strategies, methods and tools.
Azamat
----- Original Message -----
From: <jbermejo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Ontology Summit 2010 discussion" <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 3:20 PM
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Fwd: Ontologist Aptitude Test? (02)
> Hello everyone,
>
> For what it is worth it, here goes my personal experience on how to become
> an ontologist.
>
> I could be considered a potential or in-progress ontologist. I am a
> Computer Science engineer from Spain who had long working on knowledge
> engineering, modelling and so forth.
>
> Some four years ago, for my PhD thesis, I was suggested to build up an
> ontology to support the analysis, design and implementation process of a
> certain kind of control-based systems. Fine with me, but at the time the
> first question was: what is an ontology?
>
> Naively, I looked for some courses, seminars or some kind of training on
> the topic. There are not that many, I found just a handful in Spain as
> Summer Camps, MSc or PhD seminars which had either taken place time ago or
> I could not registered in. No new courses were offered, or I was unable to
> find them both in Europe and the US.
>
> Hence, the training to become an ontologist followed the path of finding
> books and references from well-known ontologists. I was lucky enough to
> find a couple of just published books on ontological engineering and
> ontologies for software engineering.
>
> I have to say that learning from scratch about ontologies, ontological
> commitments, languages, tools, linguistic and ontological instantiation,
> etc has not been easy.
>
> The real struggle started when I had to develop my own ontology. How do
> you do that? I do not have a full answer. Already established
> methodologies helped me as a guide. The rest, common sense, prior
> knowledge engineering and test and error procedures. As a result, an
> ontology suitable enough for our needs, which I hope will grow as our
> research evolves. And a PhD dissertation on its way, trying to explain the
> entire ontological engineering process.
>
> Have I become an ontologist? Hard to say. What is the main feature which
> has made me an ontologist (if I am one)? My (humble) knowledge on
> ontological engineering or the (possibly incomplete) ontology I have
> developed?
>
> Possibly, if I have to go through a multiple choice test now on the topic,
> I will fail it. Knowing the theory just helps, does not make you an
> ontologist. If I do need a language or a tool, I will learn it on the
> spot, when I do really need it. No use to remember OWL, RDF, etc by heart.
> The important thing for me was to sit down and train my brain to think
> different from what I was used to do.
>
> A last comment. Trying to explain to non-ontologist people what you are
> doing, has been difficult. I had to start explaining to my own research
> team what an ontology is, what I was doing, and most importantly, how it
> will help them as down-to-earth software and hardware engineers. People
> are not used to deal with concepts, relations, attributes and axioms. It
> is too abstract to grasp.
>
> Regards,
>
> Julita Bermejo-Alonso
>
>
>>
>>> Surely every ontologist should have created an ontology, be able to
> explain their modelling choices, compare to what they found out there and
> so on as well as to have a vague idea of how it might be used. That could
> be a short-thesis.
>>
>> I agree that every potential ontologist (since we haven't determined if
> they really are one yet) should be able to present one or more
> ontologies
>> and support their design decisions. A very good thesis would also
> explain
>> the tradeoffs that were made by the decision.
>>
>
>>
>>> This should allow demonstrating familiarity with relevant tools, but
> tools are varied and what matters is the ability to learn them as need
> arises.
>>
>> I'm not convinced that you can test for the ability to learn a tool,
> only
>> that you have demonstrated proficiency with a specific tool. But that
> doesn't mean that being a Certified Cisco Network Engineer is irrelevant
> when looking for a supervisor of HP networking equipment, because it
> demonstrates that someone has the patience and persistence. I'm
> interested in knowing that if somebody says they have the aptitude for
> being an ontologist, has anyone put that to a test? What were the
> questions?
>>
>>> I hope, at any rate, there will never be any multiple choice tests in
> serious ontology teaching...
>>
>> I wouldn't go that far, especially during teaching. Multiple choices
> tests are perfect when there is a definitive answer. The simplest I can
> think of off the cuff, "Does the sample ontology in part A involve open-
> or closed-world assumptions?" (and the word "involve" might not be the
> right one)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/OntologySummit2009/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2010
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/ (03)
_________________________________________________________________
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/OntologySummit2009/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2010
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/ (04)
|