ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] [Making the Case] Barriers to adoption of ontologi

To: Ontology Summit 2011 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Jack Park <jackpark@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 09:43:22 -0800
Message-id: <AANLkTikUjrDBQmgQY_L8xxbT5Ka=GzGk_1M_4q2VyqfZ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Let me offer a comment on this process since there is a goal of
creating an issue map (aka: dialogue map) of these results. The
comment relates to what is needed for issue mapping to be facilitated.    (01)

An issue map is a tree structure, rooted typically in either a
well-posed question, or a context statement from which questions
arise. For instance, this thread leads to the question "what are the
barriers to adoption of ontology based solutions?"    (02)

Answers to that question are created in nodes that respond (are
linked) to the question. Each node should contain one and only one
answer, one idea. If there are several ideas, each is its own answer.    (03)

The answer should be concise, not paragraphs of explanation.
Paragraphs of explanation are saved for an internal component of the
node, we call that "details".  But, there are considerations about
explanations.    (04)

If an explanation introduces another claim, that should be another
idea node linked to the original answer rather than be buried in the
details.  The point of an issue map is to surface the claims,
questions, and arguments. Each claim should be its own addressable
(linkable) node.    (05)

Here is the trivial example.
  What are the causes of climate change?
      CO2 in the upper atmosphere
      Greenhouse gasses
          CO2
          CH4
and so forth.    (06)

The trivial example shows that one contributor went straight for CO2
and another chose to start with the higher-level category, then build
on that.  When a facilitator cleans up the map, just one node that
supplies the answer CO2 will be used.  Details of how CO2 comes to be
defined as a greenhouse gas would be left to the paragraphs unless
someone really thinks that the science is worthy of further debate.    (07)

Cheers
Jack    (08)

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Matthew West
<dr.matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> Please add to this thread barriers to adoption of ontologies and ontology
> based solutions you have encountered and any strategies you have found
> helpful in overcoming them.
>
> Regards
>
> Matthew West
> Information  Junction
> Tel: +44 560 302 3685
> Mobile: +44 750 3385279
> Skype: dr.matthew.west
> matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>
> This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England
> and Wales No. 6632177.
> Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
> Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/
>    (09)

_________________________________________________________________
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/     (010)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>