ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] Invitation to a brainstorming call for the 2011 On

To: Ontology Summit 2011 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Jack Ring <jring7@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 15:28:38 -0700
Message-id: <9B3CD931-031B-44C4-8ECD-CBF8C31C1217@xxxxxxxxx>
Regarding Nicola's quite relevant concern (below) it may be useful to note that 
a) quality is binary, not a scalar (Crosby, Deming, Juran, etc.) Quality 
signifies conformance to requirements, Yes or No,  therefore 'high quality' is 
meaningless.
b) note carefully that from the usage viewpoint the requirements amount to 'fit 
for purpose' (Checkland) or 'satisficing' (Simon).
c) both proof of correctness and exhaustive test are futile, therefore not 
included.
d) the goal becomes warranty that the ontology of interest is devoid of 
internal faults and external incompatibilities wherein warranty means zero 
false positives and false negatives.
e) an appropriate theme may be "Making the case for adequate, accurate and 
timely ontologies" which embraces both the result and the development activity.
f) whether any ontology is viable or not depends on both the ontology and the 
intended usage.
g) this means that any cadre of ontology developers must include members who 
are dedicated to independent and objective assessment of the viability of any 
ontology or patch thereof or ordered set of patches.
h) fortunately, technologies, tools and methods exist (or are imminent) for 
viability assessment of algorithms of all classes and types with respect to 
intended usage. This includes ontologies. Even the spaghetti code in most 
OWL-based examples can be assessed, even simplified, and potentially made more 
"lean" without inducing 'brittle.'  
i) this is one reason why I suggested to Steve Ray that one corner of the 
Summit allow open-mind dialogue regarding new technologies.    (01)

Onward,
Jack Ring    (02)


On Dec 14, 2010, at 5:00 AM, Nicola Guarino wrote:    (03)

> Dear colleagues,
> 
>       I also agree very much with John and Matthew concerning the importance 
>of high quality ontologies, and on their observation that the quest for high 
>quality data models in software engineering definitely reflects a sensitivity 
>to important ontological aspects much higher than what we find in people just 
>focusing on ontology languages.
> 
>       In the light of this, I suggest to specify a bit more the overall theme 
>of our Summit, which in my opinion could be "Making the case for ontological 
>analysis" instead of "Making the case for ontology". An alternative could be 
>"Making the case for high-quality ontologies". 
> 
>       The reason for this proposal should be self-evident, I believe. 
>Deciding how much effort to put in developing a particular ontology is a 
>crucial choice, and it is very important to distinguish the cases where a 
>proper ontological analysis pays off, and is indeed a crucial aspect of 
>success, from those where a "lightweight" approach is sufficient. 
> 
>       Just brainstorming... 
> 
> Talk to you soon,
> 
> Nicola
> 
> 
> 
> On 9 Dec 2010, at 16:03, John F. Sowa wrote:
> 
>> Dear Matthew and Peter,
>> 
>> MW:
>>> ... my forthcoming book “Developing High Quality Data Models”. Substitute
>>> ontology for data model and the same argument applies. The benefits come
>>> from improving and automating decision making through fit-for-purpose
>>> information to support those decisions.
>> 
>> I very strongly agree.  Software engineers have been doing ontology
>> (avant la lettre, as they say) for a very long time.  And much of that
>> work has been very good -- sometimes much better than what people are
>> doing with so-called ontology languages.
>> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/OntologySummit2011/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011  
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (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/OntologySummit2011/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (05)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>