On Tue, May 1, 2012 6:58 AM, Paul Brown wrote: (01)
> A likely scenario drawn from this discussion is one in which one party
> views the marriage as the event while another party views the marriage
> as the state. (02)
They are not both "view[ing] *the marriage*". They are considering what
the English word "marriage" suggests to them most strongly. This is an
NL issue, not an ontology issue. An ontology can establish multiple
denotations for a word. It is up to the NLP folk to interpret which of 50
meanings of "marriage" is meant in a given sentence. Ontologists can
help by ontologizing each of those 50 meanings and encode enough
information about each that the NLP process can select the most probable
meaning(s) in a given context. (03)
> They are never going to agree on a common definition,
> because each has its own concept. (04)
What's the disagreement? The name to call a term in an ontology?
What is the point of arguing over the correct meaning of one of these:
http://www.w3.org/2000/07/hs78/KIF?word=Command
http://umbel.org/umbel/sc/Command
http://sw.opencyc.org/2009/04/07/concept/Mx4rvVjaxpwpEbGdrcN5Y29ycA
So long as your meaning is available, you have a means of accessing it,
and it is well documented, the URI used should not matter. (05)
I don't find Java programmers having major disagreements with
what the name of a Class or Method *should* be. Someone
defines a Class or Method and describes it so that potential users
will know what it is and what it does. If it is useful, programmers
who have no connection with the creator of the software object use
it. (06)
Why should ontologists act any differently? (07)
> Yet these two concepts are definitely related: One
> marks the point of state transition that is part of the other's model. (08)
> I think this is illustrative of situations (pardon the double entendre) we
> are going to encounter in the real world! (09)
Fights over names so often cloud the real issues. (010)
Maybe banning ontologies from having terms whose names have less than
three words would eliminate the arguments over names! 8)# (011)
Seriously, we might be able to reduce this problem if we always
put a namespace in front of an ontology term (if not the full URI).
Would anyone really expect USC:Marriage, choreog:Marriage, and
pinochle:Marriage to mean the same thing? (012)
-- doug (013)
> -- PCB
>
> ****************************************************************************
> **************
> Paul C. Brown
> Principal Software Architect
> TIBCO Software Inc.
> Email: pbrown@xxxxxxxxx Mobile: 518-424-5360
>
> "Total architecture is not a choice - it is a concession to reality."
> Visit www.total-architecture.com
> Architecture Books:
> -- Succeeding With SOA: Realizing Business Value Through Total
> Architecture
> -- Implementing SOA: Total Architecture In Practice
> -- TIBCO Architecture Fundamentals
>
> The SOA Manifesto: soa-manifesto.org
>
> Read the TIBCO blog: www.thetibcoblog.com
> ****************************************************************************
> **************
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cory Casanave [mailto:cory-c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:17 AM
> To: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
> Cc: simfteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; simf-rfp@xxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>
> I would agree - there are 2 concepts under the label "Marriage", a
> situation
> and an event. The intent of the example in the web page is the situation
> but
> you may well also represent the event for extra credit!
> -Cory
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:ontology-summit- bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hans
>> Polzer
>> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 9:55 PM
>> To: 'Ontology Summit 2012 discussion'
>> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>>
>> Isn't it both? Marriage is both a state transition (the rite that
>> signals the transition to a married state from an unmarried state),
>> and a steady state condition after the state transition occurs (as in
>> "their marriage has lasted for
>> 50 years"). The word "wedding" is often used to distinguish between
>> the state transition and the steady state condition, denoting the
>> former but not the latter (although common usage isn't always precise
>> on this point, as in "wedded bliss").
>>
>> Hans
>>
>> Hans
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jack
>> Ring
>> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 8:44 PM
>> To: doug@xxxxxxxxxx; Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
>> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>>
>> ??
>> Marriage is a situation in which a couple BECOMES married.") On Apr
>> 30, 2012, at 1:39 PM, doug foxvog wrote:
>>
>> > Marriage is a situation in which a couple is married.")
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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/
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4971 - Release Date: 05/01/12
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/
> (014)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (015)
|