Dear Ray, (01)
I hesitate to edit without some agreement a document that
is intended to be a joint agreement. So I will present those
things that I disagree with for discusion. (02)
First from the Background. (03)
"A new initiative is needed to find agreement on a set of
basic concepts that can be easily understood and exploited
by diverse communities of users to permit their systems to
accurately exchange detailed meanings for the concepts they
need to communicate with each other." (04)
I think there is a chance to find some mid level things that
could be imported into different upper ontologies (changing
the precise meaning in the process - eg. 3D cars vs 4D cars).
However, I don't think there is ONE set of basic concepts
that can be shared by diverse UPPER ontologies (top few
hundred objects). (05)
If some or all of the 3D ontologies wanted to, I could see
them agreeing some common upper level concepts, or in some
cases even merging. If particular ontology ambassadors are
in a position to agree to working with specific other
ontologies to this end, then I think that would make a good
news story. (06)
I propose this paragraph is deleted. If others agreed,
something reflecting the more limited ambitions I identify
above might replace this. (07)
Following on from that in the Conclusions in Brief (08)
"(2) Each of the existing upper ontologies differs in
specifics of implementation, but we all agree that use of
some formally defined common upper ontology is the most
cost-effective method for achieving scalable semantic
interoperability." (09)
Delete "common" (010)
"(5) As one means of interrelating the existing upper
ontologies, we plan to explore the possibility of creating
a common subset ontology that will be accurately
translatable into each of the linked upper ontologies.
In addition to making the existing upper ontologies more
easily accessible, this can provide a simple but powerful
tool to allow users to explore creation of interoperable
systems with basic reasoning capability on a pilot scale." (011)
I think this is fine, as it is not too specific and would
allow the kinds of outcomes I have suggested as realistic
above. (012)
Regards (013)
Matthew West
Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom (014)
Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/ (015)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (016)
|