ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] {quality-methodology} Architectural considerations

To: ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: John F Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:56:20 -0500
Message-id: <511BFDF4.5030709@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On 2/13/2013 12:42 PM, Chris Partridge wrote:
> So, to use a limit case example, one has a choice whether to have or not
> to have a top ontology.    (01)

There is always a top to any ontology.  Therefore, the only choices
are about what goes in the top, the middle, and the lower levels.    (02)

We have several sources of guidance in making those choices:    (03)

  1. Physics:  The latest and greatest theories about the universe
     and how everything in it is related.    (04)

  2. Language:  How do people talk about #1.  This includes a wide
     range of sublanguages (What Wittgenstein called language games)
     for every possible application.    (05)

  3. Computer applications:  How do we organize all the data derived
     from #1 and #2 and use that organization to develop better systems.    (06)

  4. Metaphysics:  What have the best minds of the past and present
     said about #1, #2, and #3.    (07)

Points #3 and #4 can be considered special cases of #2:  every system
of computer science and philosophy is expressible in natural languages.
And every formal language or logic is just a controlled NL, often with
additional symbols as abbreviations for NL words and phrases.    (08)

So we really only have two sources:  the universe and the ways we talk
about the universe.    (09)

> if one has made the choice to have a top ontology, then should probably
> consider these choices before getting too far into the development.    (010)

Certainly.  My only comment is to say (a) we have no choice,
and (b) omit the word 'probably'.    (011)

> I quoted Martin Fowler, quoting Ralph Johnson who implied that even
> if we do this, we are unlikely to get it totally right.    (012)

I certainly agree with that.  Therefore, my recommendations are    (013)

  1. Make the top levels very general.    (014)

  2. Keep the options open, and don't make a commitment unless
     there is a good reason for it.    (015)

  3. Design the ontology in a way that is easy to modify or adapt
     as needed.    (016)

  4. Whenever possible, use automated or semi-automated methods
     so that the modifications can be done by pushing a button.    (017)

John    (018)

_________________________________________________________________
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/OntologySummit2013/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2013  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (019)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>