I'm not sure that we want to be that explicit about the mechanism (i.e. mapping
from schema) in the high level statement. But maybe it is ok. (01)
On the whole, this statement sounds good, I can agreed with its meaning, and
the wording is pretty good too. (02)
M. (03)
-----Original Message-----
From: Nicola Guarino [mailto:guarino@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 4:37 AM
To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
Subject: Re: [uos-convene] Other Approaches Too (04)
What about: (05)
"Mapping local conceptual schemes [or ontologies, if you prefer] to a common
upper ontology is the most cost-effective method for achieving scalable
semantic interoperability." (06)
Nicola (07)
On Mar 2, 2006, at 11:47 AM, West, Matthew R SIPC-DFD/321 wrote: (08)
> Dear Pat,
>
> OK getting picky now.
>
> A CUO is not a method...
>
> Regards
>
> Matthew
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Cassidy,
>> Patrick J.
>> Sent: 01 March 2006 15:08
>> To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
>> Subject: RE: [uos-convene] Other Approaches Too
>>
>>
>> OK, try again:
>>
>> "A common upper ontology is the most cost-effective method for
>> achieving scalable semantic interoperability."
>>
>> We can maintain a commentary on the UOS Wiki where individuals so
>> inclined can provide their interpretations of the various words in
>> the statement, which would make that statement true in their view.
>> That would be a public place to express reservations.
>>
>> e.g. My first comment on "cost-effective" might be: "cost-effective
>> by a wide margin over any other technique that has been proposed"
>>
>> Pat
>>
>> Patrick Cassidy
>> MITRE Corporation
>> 260 Industrial Way
>> Eatontown, NJ 07724
>> Mail Stop: MNJE
>> Phone: 732-578-6340
>> Cell: 908-565-4053
>> Fax: 732-578-6012
>> Email: pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bill
>> Andersen
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 9:20 AM
>> To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
>> Subject: Re: [uos-convene] Other Approaches Too.
>>
>> Thanks, Matthew...
>>
>> You know. I should read my own posts. What's wrong with saying ROI?
>> When we're talking about building computer systems and not
>> philosophy, that *is* what we're talking about in the end. Thanks
>> again.
>>
>> Shall we put this alongside the existing wording and see which people
>> like better?
>>
>> .bill
>>
>> On Mar 1, 2006, at 04:14 , West, Matthew R SIPC-DFD/321 wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Bill,
>>>
>>> You say:
>>>
>>>> The point here is that the ROI from using ULO for both domain
>>>> ontology construction and for integration is higher than similar
>>>> attempts undertaken without ULO.
>>>
>>> I agree.
>>>
>>> I think this is what we really want to say, rather than whether it
>>> is essential or indeispensible. It is a simple economic argument
>>> that ought to be listened to by potential funders.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Matthew West
>>> Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager Shell
>>> International Petroleum Company Limited Shell Centre, London SE1
>>> 7NA, United Kingdom
>>>
>>> Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
>>> Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
>>> http://www.shell.com
>>> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Bill
>>>> Andersen
>>>> Sent: 28 February 2006 23:47
>>>> To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
>>>> Subject: Re: [uos-convene] Other Approaches Too.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hey Mike,
>>>>
>>>> See below.
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 28, 2006, at 18:31 , Uschold, Michael F wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> To the extent that 'Indispensable' is a semantic dead-ringer for
>>>>> 'essential', this suggestion amounts to changing 'essential' to
>>>>> 'increasingly essential'.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, indispensable and essential are pretty black and white
>>>>> concepts, Either it is or it is not.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is not clear what 'increasingly essential's means. Nearer to a
>>>>> state of being essential, crossing that b/w divide?
>>>>>
>>>>> The more I think about it, the more I'm ok with the other wording,
>>>>> by I forget who.
>>>>>
>>>>> Something like "essential for affordable and ... semantic
>>>>> interoperability"
>>>>>
>>>>> This is less controversial.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not certain that "less controversial" is something we ought to
>>>> be shooting for. The very position that ULO brings something
>>>> qualitatively different to building and successfully employing
>>>> ontologies is what's being assumed in this forum by its
>>>> participants. I don't know about the other "public" participants,
>>>> but we at Ontology Works have had much success applying our ULO and
>>>> Barry Smith documents similar success:
>>>>
>>>> Jonathan Simon, James Matthew Fielding and Barry Smith, "Using
>>>> Philosophy to Improve the Coherence and Interoperability of
>>>> Applications Ontologies: A Field Report on the Collaboration of
>>>> IFOMIS and L&C", in Gregor Büchel, Bertin Klein and Thomas Roth-
>>>> Berghofer (eds.), Proceedings of the First Workshop on Philosophy
>>>> and Informatics. Deutsches Forschungszentrum für künstliche
>> Intelligenz,
>>>> Cologne: 2004, 65-72.
>>>> http://ontology.buffalo.edu/medo/FOBKSI.pdf
>>>>
>>>> The point here is that the ROI from using ULO for both domain
>>>> ontology construction and for integration is higher than similar
>>>> attempts undertaken without ULO. Thus, I don't think Barry's
>>>> wording is too strong at all. I would dare say that the onus is on
>>>> those who advocate some other path to show that ULO does not have
>>>> these differential ROI benefits. To do that, they would have to
>>>> say how they, without ULO, would have reproduced all the same
>>>> results - and at less cost. Such trade studies are sadly lacking.
>>>>
>>>> .bill
>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
>>>> To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/ Shared Files:
>>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
>>>> Community Wiki:
>>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
>>> To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
>>> Shared Files:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/
>> uos-convene/
>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?
>> UpperOntologySummit
>>
>
> Bill Andersen (andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
> Chief Scientist
> Ontology Works, Inc. (www.ontologyworks.com)
> 3600 O'Donnell Street, Suite 600
> Baltimore, MD 21224
> Office: 410-675-1201
> Cell: 443-858-6444
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
> To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
> Shared Files:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
> Community Wiki:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
> To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/
> uos-convene/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?
> UpperOntologySummit
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
> To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/
> uos-convene/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?
> UpperOntologySummit
> (09)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Nicola Guarino
Co-Editor in Chief, Applied Ontology (IOS Press)
Head, Laboratory for Applied Ontology (LOA), ISTC-CNR
Institute for Cognitive Sciences and Technologies
National Research Council
Via Solteri, 38
I-38100 Trento (010)
phone: +39 0461 828486
secretary: +39 0461 436641
fax: +39 0461 435344
email: guarino@xxxxxxxxxx
web site: http://www.loa-cnr.it (011)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit (012)
|