|
I have some comments to this, which I
hope we can discuss at the appropriate session. In brief, as with
the classification of books, a classification scheme for subjects
and a classification scheme for classes of "Thing", are two
separate matters! I hope we are able to keep this in mind. Let's
discuss when we meet.
Best regards,
Mike
On 23/07/2013 17:16, Till Mossakowski wrote:
Dear all,
Aleksandra Sojic has created a first version of the meta ontology,
see
https://github.com/ontohub/OOR_Ontohub_API/blob/master/Domain_fields.owl
- use "raw" for downloading and viewing with Protégé:
https://raw.github.com/ontohub/OOR_Ontohub_API/master/Domain_fields.owl
This ontology provides a meta-classification that according to the
domain subjects distributes domain-ontologies into the
domain-specific classes. As the reference classification we have
considered several international standards which are used to
classify domain fields. The International Standard Classification
of Education (ISCED) has been selected as the most appropriate
reference for the specification of the (subject) categories within
the OntoHub. ISCED is a member of the United Nations International
Family of Economic and Social Classifications and is the reference
classification for organizing education programmes and related
qualifications by levels and fields of education (ref. ISCED). In
particular, we have used the last version of ISCED (the final
draft published in June 2013) as it provides a hierarchy of
knowledge domains suitable for covering comprehensively the
corresponding ontology-modelling fields.
The Domain-fields-ontology has to be developed further in order to
include several other specifications, especially considering the
domains which experience a significant expansion in the ontology
development, e.g. Life Sciences.
Please find attached a graphical visualisation of the recently
published Domain-fields ontology.
Best, Till
Am 29.05.2013 21:30, schrieb matthew lange:
We aren't taking the lead
in this categorization effort but if a standard (defacto or
not) does
arise we would be interested in adapting our system to use
it.
Watching this thread, and interested as well...do you have a
reference
for who is heading this up?
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Ray Fergerson
<ray.fergerson@xxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ray.fergerson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Oliver,
Worth pointing out is that we (the NCBO team) don't feel
that the
current
BioPortal categorization is very good. It should probably
not be used as
the basis for anything. There are external efforts to
produce a
categorization system for the biomedical domain. We aren't
taking
the lead
in this categorization effort but if a standard (defacto or
not) does
arise we would be interested in adapting our system to use
it.
Ray
-----Original Message-----
From: oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>] On Behalf
Of Till
Mossakowski
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 12:14 AM
To: oor-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:oor-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Oliver Kutz
Subject: Re: [oor-forum] Categories for ontologies
P.S.
the interesting question is then: what happens if we
federate BioPortal
with SOCoP? We need a taxonomy including all the involved
categories, such
that in the ontology browser, all the BioPortal categories
are combined
into one category "biology" (which can be expanded into the
BioPortal
categories on demand).
Till
Am 29.05.2013 08:53, schrieb Till Mossakowski:
> Am 29.05.2013 00:29, schrieb John F Sowa:
>> On 5/28/2013 4:27 PM, Till Mossakowski wrote:
>>> After all, the user wants to use *one*
ontology or classification
>>> system for classifying ontologies.
>>
>> What do you mean "one classification system"?
>
> In BioPortal, when the user uploads a new ontology,
(s)he can provide
> some categories classifying the ontology. When
browsing all
> ontologies, you can also filter them by category.
> The possible categories are: Animal Development,
Biological Process,
> Human, Plant, Yeast, Cell etc. (Btw, not all
categories returned by
> the REST service can be selected for browsing.) The
OOR instance
> http://mercury-ncbo.ornl.gov seems to (erroneously)
use the same
> categories In the OOR instance http://socop.oor.net,
the categories
> are (exhaustive
> list): Commercial, Cultural, Defense, Financial,
Geospatial,
> Government, Literature, Metadata, Other, Process,
Provenance,
Science,
> Social Networking, Standards, Technology, Upper
Ontologies.
> I now just wonder what we should do for Ontohub.
>
>> The number of different kinds of ontologies, their
purposes, goals,
>> applications, levels, logics, notations, uses,
etc., is open-ended.
>>
>> Suppose that somebody asked you to compare Cyc to
BFO to the Good
>> Relations ontology to schema.org
<http://schema.org>. Where
would you begin? And why?
>
> It is not about comparing ontologies. It is just that
the "filter by
> category" dropdown box on the browsing web page needs
to show a
finite
> list of options to the user...
>
> Best, Till
>
--
Prof. Dr. Till Mossakowski Cartesium, room 2.51 Phone
+49-421-218-64226 <tel:%2B49-421-218-64226>
DFKI GmbH Bremen Fax
+49-421-218-9864226
<tel:%2B49-421-218-9864226>
Cyber-Physical Systems Till.Mossakowski@xxxxxxx
<mailto:Till.Mossakowski@xxxxxxx>
Enrique-Schmidt-Str. 5, D-28359 Bremen
http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~till/
Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Kuenstliche Intelligenz
GmbH principal
office, *not* the address for mail etc.!!!:
Trippstadter Str. 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern management
board: Prof.
Wolfgang Wahlster (chair), Dr. Walter Olthoff supervisory
board: Prof.
Hans A. Aukes (chair) Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/
Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<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
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/
Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<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
_________________________________________________________________
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
_________________________________________________________________
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
|
_________________________________________________________________
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 (01)
|