Arun +: This would be extremely useful. Is anyone working on building
quantitative classes, properties, end points, whatever into an ontology, or an
approach for this to happen? (01)
Or, does it already exist? (02)
Dennis E. Wisnosky
Department of Defense
Business Mission Area
Chief Architect and Chief Technical Officer
703-607-3440
C630-240-6910 (03)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Arun
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 11:28 AM
To: Ontology Summit 2011 discussion
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] [Ontology Application Framework] Revised
Strawman Proposal (04)
Hi, (05)
Agreed - in fact any business can be ontologically decomposed into functional
business units and these in turn into the infrastructure components (including
humans) that enable the business units to inter-operate. On the other hand, I
would like to see more quantitative approaches integrated with the qualitative
approach because I like to put numbers to things so I can get a clearer
understand what "value" really means. (06)
For example, on what aspects of ontology (or its dimensions) should we
prioritize effort? How do we evaluate where we get the most value, the
greatest return on investment in the short term relative to the long term. I
realize everyone likes the long term benefits that ontologies promise, however,
many business managers would be hard pressed in these economic times to spend
money on the far future as opposed to the near term tangible and concrete
bottom line. (07)
So my hope is to stimulate discussion about what other models (and I suggest
AHP) might be combined with the ontology framework that is meaningful to a
high-level, non-scientific, business savvy decision maker: that kind of
decision maker is a lot like an investor - they have a portfolio of options,
one of which is more money in the thing called "ontology" or more money into
some other "thing". Where's the compelling case for the return on investment.
I believe that for any case to be compelling, it *must* be quantitatively
presented in the hard-bottom line terms that business experts understand. (08)
Hope this is useful food for thought. (09)
Thanks, (010)
Arun (011)
On 3/1/11 11:12 AM, Jack Ring wrote: (012)
I suggest that an ontology is a key aspect of the enterprise
infrastructure. If architecture is "The arrangement of function and feature
that maximizes an objective" then infrastructure are the functions and features
that are factored out because they support all the others. Generally,
infrastructure provides for commonality of location/dimension, support, access,
access control, and services. Ontology enables human knowledge exchange and
choice making. An EA Framework is one facet of an enterprise ontology,
presuming, of course, that an ontology can refer to 'itself.' (013)
On Mar 1, 2011, at 8:26 AM, Pavithra wrote: (014)
Hi Arun, (015)
I believe it is possible to incorporate Ontology as an artifact or work
product to an exiting Enterprise Architecture framework and road map.. I call
it Semantic Enterprise Architecture. The assessment or the checklist to find
out the readiness would be another artifact or work product in the road map as
well.. We had some presentations on Semantic Enterprise Architecture tools in
the past sessions in this forum. (016)
OAF can be refined to include more specific information about Ontology. Or
renamed if the other people agree. At present, some organizations have a
centralized Data Dictionary or terminology and descriptions, but there is no
consistent understanding of what comprises ”Ontology" for the organization. (017)
Hope that helps,
Pavithra (018)
--- On Tue, 3/1/11, Arun <arun@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: (019)
From: Arun <arun@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] [Ontology Application Framework] Revised
Strawman Proposal
To: "Ontology Summit 2011 discussion" <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2011, 8:28 AM (020)
Hi, (021)
The Ontology Application Framework (OAF) reminds of the Technology
Readiness Level (NASA's TRL's) that one could use with another tool, like an
Analytic Hierarchical Process (AHP) to identify an ontology dependency and
development strategy for the larger enterprise: for example, knowing what you
have, what you don't have, and therefore, what you need to have, would a kind
of "inventory" mechanism that a document along the lines of this one might
provide. As an industry developer with clients in the public and private
sector spaces, I tend to do this similar kind of road-map work almost
semi-automatically for any new job because I always need some kind of inventory
that serves the purpose of seeing the client road map and what the barriers to
success might be. (022)
While the OAF document uses words like "value metrics" it does not
indicate what methodology is used whereby qualitative and often subject
judgments are input and objective numerical evaluations as outputs (aka value
metrics) are used. My preference is AHP and other portfolio valuation methods. (023)
The OAF might be the seed for someone to take it further and a create a
kind of Zachman *style* framework or model which becomes a tool for rapid
assessment in strategic road map development, and therefore, critical and
quantitative budgeting, for the renovation of legacy enterprises and/or legacy
with new technology integration paths that are productivity and cost optimal. (024)
I don't like the acronym "OAF" since it sounds like the dictionary word
"oaf" ( according to Merriam-Webster, a big clumsy slow witted person). Even
though my point seems trite, some critical managers might find that acronym
disconcerting. And we need all the help we can get. (025)
Perhaps a name along the lines of Road-mapping Ontology Model (ROM)
which corresponds also with a popular acronym for Rough Order of Magnitude
might be useful. (026)
Or perhaps I am just missing the point entirely? (027)
Thanks, (028)
Arun Majumdar (029)
On 2/28/11 8:51 AM, Wisnosky, Dennis E OSD DCMO wrote: (030)
And, its purpose? (031)
Dennis E. Wisnosky
Department of Defense
Business Mission Area
Chief Architect and Chief Technical Officer
703-607-3440
C630-240-6910 (032)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<x-msg://388/mc/compose?to=ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<x-msg://388/mc/compose?to=ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ] On
Behalf Of Michael Gruninger
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 4:29 PM
To: ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<x-msg://388/mc/compose?to=ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ontology-summit] [Ontology Application Framework]
Revised Strawman Proposal (033)
Attached is a revision of the Ontology Application Framework
that was originally presented at the Feb 3 telecon. (034)
- michael (035)
_________________________________________________________________
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
<x-msg://388/mc/compose?to=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/ (036)
--
WARNING: THIS EMAIL IS COVERED BY THE ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY
ACT, 18 U.S.C. § 2510-2521 AND IS LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. THE INFORMATION
CONTAINED IN THIS MESSAGE AND THE ATTACHMENT, IF ANY, IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE
UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. (037)
-----Inline Attachment Follows----- (038)
_________________________________________________________________
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
<x-msg://388/mc/compose?to=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/ (039)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (040)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (041)
--
WARNING: THIS EMAIL IS COVERED BY THE ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY ACT, 18
U.S.C. § 2510-2521 AND IS LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN
THIS MESSAGE AND THE ATTACHMENT, IF ANY, IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER
APPLICABLE LAW. (042)
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (01)
|