David, Kingsley, and Jack, (01)
I agree with all the points in your notes of Jan 31.
Some comments: (02)
DP
> Most big data app logic/algorithms are far more complex
> than can be written in logic languages. (03)
But I would replace the word 'logic' with 'any humanly intelligible'.
Since a digital computer and every program that runs on it can be
specified in logic, it is possible in principle to write that spec.
However, the result would not be humanly intelligible -- and the
spec would be obsolete in the next download. (04)
The goal of ontology is to state a large chunk of what people
think about a subject in a version of logic that (a) is humanly
understandable and (b) can be processed on a digital computer. (05)
DP
> I hope everyone realizes that there are many very practical use
> cases where RDF/OWL solves a problem and where the DL dogma is
> not relevant (06)
I very strongly agree with that point. If the SW aficionados would
call OWL *A* Web Ontology Language, I would have no disagreements. (07)
KI
> The issue is big data variety. (08)
That point is fundamental. (09)
There are many useful ways of processing Big Data with current tools
(including the SW stack). But the variety is so immense that *no*
currently available tools, theories, or methodologies can do or say
everything that needs to be said and done. (010)
It's fine to tell application developers what they can do with current
tools. But it's essential to tell the inventors that *none* of the
current tools *or* theories can cope with the immense variety. (011)
JR
> Should we be considering ontogeny as well as ontology? (012)
That's an excellent idea. (013)
The online M-W dictionary defines 'ontogeny' as
> the development or course of development especially
> of an individual organism (014)
We could replace the word 'organism' with various terms:
computer system, enterprise, society, etc. (015)
No matter what organism or system we're trying to understand,
a static description is inadequate. (016)
A developmental view is essential. Engineers recognize that
every product they design is obsolete on the day it is shipped. (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/OntologySummit2014/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (019)
|