On 14/04/2010 12:25 PM, John F. Sowa wrote:
> Ron,
>
> There are some kinds of vetting that can be done fairly easily,
> and the major part of the burden should be placed on the people
> who design the ontology and contribute it to the OOR.
>
>
+1 (01)
> RW> It is difficult to see how any group can vet the entire range
> > of human activities.
>
> Since the full range is unlimited, that is obviously impossible.
> But the metadata of the OOR can and should include evaluations,
> pro and con, by people who actually used the ontology.
>
Separate from the artifact metadata submitted above and "owned" by the
reviewer since you do not want it overwritten by the author who "owns"
the ontology submission.
Who vets the users doing the review??? And so on. (02)
> One of the most important tests is consistency. In general,
> a proof of consistency can be undecidable or take an exponential
> amount of time. For example, any theory that has at least one
> model is guaranteed to be consistent, but finding a model for
> an arbitrary theory is as difficult as using a theorem prover.
>
> However, people don't develop ontologies in a vacuum. They
> usually start with at least one application, and they begin
> by describing the entities that actually occur in that
> application. That application is indeed a model, and its
> existence demonstrates consistency.
>
> See slide 6 of the following talk for that point:
>
> http://www.jfsowa.com/talks/sionto.pdf
>
> The minimal vetting that I would recommend for the OOR is to
> require at least one model for each contributed ontology.
> Then the consistency test for that ontology can be done by
> pushing a button to check the ontology against the model.
>
> RW> What are you going to do if the DoD adopts an ontology for
> > contracting that has not been vetted? Or Federal Reserve for
> > interbank reporting? Or Walmart for provisioning, payments and
> > warranty claims?
>
> I would push the button and check whether it was consistent.
> If they didn't include a model, I'd ask them to send the one
> that they used in designing and testing the ontology.
>
> If they didn't have such a model, I'd notify my congressman
> that the gov't is screwing up.
>
>
And they would add that to the current list maintained by the "Tea
Party"? Right under "Obama care" and ahead of "Runaway spending". (03)
Ron (04)
> John
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/sio-dev/
> Join Community: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/sio-dev/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:sio-dev-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/SIO/
> Community Wiki:
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SharingIntegratingOntologies
>
>
> (05)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/sio-dev/
Join Community: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/sio-dev/
Unsubscribe: mailto:sio-dev-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/SIO/
Community Wiki:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SharingIntegratingOntologies (06)
|