oor-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [oor-forum] Defining "Ontology Repository" (maybe "OntologyRegistry"

To: OpenOntologyRepository-discussion <oor-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Peter Yim" <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 09:33:53 -0800
Message-id: <af8f58ac0802040933h68f987c2pc85f7c409607b3ac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> [DN]  can someone clarify what is meant by 'related
> information artefacts'? Do you mean artefacts related to particular
> ontologies, or do you mean ontologies 'and similar' (i.e., do you mean to
> include other kinds of knowledge organisation systems (KOS) like
> classification schemes and taxonomies?)    (01)

[ppy]  what I (and probably a few others in the Jan-23 discussion) had
in mind when discussing the original proposals,) "artefacts related to
particular ontologies" are those that were addressed during Ontology
Summit 2007 [1] - which revolved around the theme of: "Ontology,
Taxonomy, Folksonomy: Understanding the Distinctions."  This would
include "artifacts" that various communities may "call an ontology"
and those they are spread out  over the "ontology spectrum" (which
includes data models, database and XML schemas, taxonomies, thesaurus,
conceptual models, logical theories, etc.)    (02)

[1] Please refer to the documented input and proceedings from and the
Ontology Summit 2007 (2007.01.18~2007.04.24 plus some follow-up
activities) at:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2007    (03)

[2]  a quick overview of what had transpired can be gleaned from:    (04)

(2.1) The OntologySummit2007 Communique -
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2007_Communique
and
(2.2) A subsequent presentation entitled: "Lessons Learned from
Virtual Organizing for the Ontology Summit 2007" -
http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/Expedition_Workshop/2007-07-17_TowardsStableMeaningAndRecordsPreservation/Ontolog-Panel--OntologySummit2007-lessons-learned_20070717.ppt    (05)

Thanks & regards.  =ppy
--    (06)


On Feb 4, 2008 9:08 AM, Dennis Nicholson <d.m.nicholson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm inclined to agree with the addition of 'or'. It is entirely possible
> that a repository will not manage an ontology but only store it and allow it
> to be retrieved. Also, can someone clarify what is meant by 'related
> information artefacts'? Do you mean artefacts related to particular
> ontologies, or do you mean ontologies 'and similar' (i.e., do you mean to
> include other kinds of knowledge organisation systems (KOS) like
> classification schemes and taxonomies?)
>
> Dennis    (07)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> dbedford@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: 04 February 2008 16:34
> To: OpenOntologyRepository-discussion
> Subject: Re: [oor-forum] Defining "Ontology Repository" (maybe
> "OntologyRegistry" too) for the OOR Initiative
>
>
> All,
>
> I apologize for raising the concern - given what Dennis has described, would
> it be possible to modify the description to read...
>
> "An ontology repository is a facility where ontologies and related
> information artifacts can be stored, retrieved and/or managed."
>
> The insertion of the word "or" would make the definition acceptable to me.
> Without it, perhaps it will exclude some legitimate repository
> architectures.  I believe that 'retrieved' could be read to mean referenced.
>
> Best regards,
> Denise    (08)

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/  
Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/  
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/ 
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository     (09)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>