ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] [BigSystems and SystemsEngineering]Systemofsystems

To: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Jack Ring <jring7@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:19:26 -0700
Message-id: <BFD5CCBF-4D1A-4E56-B572-FCEB297964ED@xxxxxxxxx>
You may be remembered more fondly if you use complexness when referring to a 
system propery. 
Complexity is a property of the relationship between system complexness and 
observer naivety.
Don't let its misuse to date by enjinears confuse you.    (01)


On Jan 30, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Christopher Spottiswoode wrote:    (02)

> Jack - well spotted!
> 
> I hadn't wanted to raise that point just yet, especially as "ontology as
> algorithm" isn't exactly my favoured way of describing the essential
> issue, but in The Mainstream Architecture for Common Knowledge ontology
> and algorithm are inseparable in a way very important to the "Ontology
> Chemistry" metaphor.  That feature is even key to the agile hence
> evolvable applications that will result, as the appropriate approach to
> complexity (complexity of course including the impenetrability of Big
> Systems).
> 
> Otherwise it wouldn't be the fun I had said (below) that it will be.
> 
> ((But I really must get down to spelling the full story out properly
> here, rather than allow myself to be distracted by all these tempting
> leads...))
> 
> Enthusiastically,
> Christopher
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jack Ring" <jring7@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Ontology Summit 2012 discussion" <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 8:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] [BigSystems and
> SystemsEngineering]Systemofsystems
> 
> 
> Well, then, this panel may produce useful results if we examine the
> other aspects of Christopher's view.
> 
> If an ontology is an algorithm (however large in extent, variety and
> ambiguity) then the artifact expressing the ontology must be modularized
> and orchestration-enabled. This makes the design of the artifact a
> systemist's challenge to rationalize both the semiotic (content) and the
> architectural (structural) issues.
> 
> The Semantic Web effort seems to have missed this point.
> 
> 
> On Jan 29, 2012, at 4:36 AM, Christopher Spottiswoode wrote:
> 
>> Joe, Anatoly,
>> 
>> You both make very useful points.  Here I highlight just 2 of them:
>> 
>> AL:
>>> This ontologizing-in-the-large lead to your need to define not only
>>> ontology-as-algorithm but also communication protocol between
>>> ontology components that reside in different nodes. I doubt that 
>>> mantra about "federation" is helpful here. If you have web 
>>> programming (that is in essence programming-in-the-large) you speak 
>>> not about "federating" of web-server, load balancer, database, 
>>> web-page generation, ad banner importing, etc. but have another 
>>> engineering approach (while all that software developed by different 
>>> organizations and reside on different computers).
>> 
>> As I shall be describing in some detail later, appropriate
>> architecture leads to good 'Separation of Concerns', hence reliable 
>> and flexible application modularity while also enhancing the various 
>> other qualities usually sought.  That is what a properly 
>> ontology-based architecture should of course produce, and "federation" 
>> is a good word to describe the result at the in-the-large level.
>> 
>> In contrast to what I shall be describing, the conventional web
>> programming you highlight is complication-inducing rather than
>> complexity-respecting
>> 
>> JS:
>>> I suggest that the "binding force" or "binding concept" that forms a
>>> number of items in to one entity  is a key feature.
>> 
>> Yes!  That is indeed most strongly the case in the architecture I
>> shall be describing (or trying once again to describe, lessons 
>> hopefully having been learnt...).
>> 
>> All of which recalls that now very mainstream IS programming precept:
>> Larry Constantine's "high module cohesion with loose module coupling".
>> We don't have to reinvent that wheel.
>> 
>>> Have fun,
>>> 
>>> Joe
>> 
>> Yes thanks, Joe, we sure will!
>> 
>> Christopher
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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/OntologySummit2012/
>> Community Wiki:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012  
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (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/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (04)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>