Dear Pat, (01)
For me "community" is too far from "ontology" in this. I suggest: (02)
(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 by an organization or community is the most
cost-effective method for achieving semantic interoperability that
can scale from a few applications to diverse knowledge-based
reasoning systems. (03)
Regards (04)
Matthew West
Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom (05)
Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/ (06)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Cassidy,
> Patrick J.
> Sent: 05 March 2006 15:27
> To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
> Subject: RE: [uos-convene] "common" upper ontology?
>
>
> Possible revision:
>
> (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
> semantic interoperability that can scale from a few applications to
> large communities of diverse knowledge-based reasoning systems.
>
> The use within a "community" is more explicit here. Any better?
>
> I don't think that expanding to even more and more explicit
> descriptions of what is intended here is really necessary, since the
> nuances that seem to be of concern may only reflect a sensitivity to
> the debate about "standard" upper ontologies and "lattices"
> of theories
> that are understood within a very small community.
>
> 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 West,
> Matthew R SIPC-DFD/321
> Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 4:28 AM
> To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
> Subject: RE: [uos-convene] "common" upper ontology?
>
> Dear Pat,
>
> Perhaps it is more what is missing than the word "common". What is not
> clear is that you do not mean one standard common ontology for all
> interoperability requirements, rather than one common upper ontology
> for one particular integration exercise.
>
> So I suggest adding to what you have below after common upper ontology
> "... for a particular integration exercise.
>
> Regards
>
> Matthew
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Cassidy,
> > Patrick J.
> > Sent: 05 March 2006 04:02
> > To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
> > Subject: [uos-convene] "common" upper ontology?
> >
> >
> > Matthew West suggests a change in item 2 of the "conclusion in
> brief":
> >
> > "(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."
> >
> > [MW] Delete "common"
> >
> > [PC] the word "common" is needed to avoid giving the impression that
> > different developers can use different upper ontologies to achieve
> > semantic interoperability. to achieve "scalable semantic
> > interoperability" the sentence states that it is necessary for the
> > interoperating systems to use the same upper ontology - i.e.
> > some upper
> > ontology in common. It does not state that all systems have
> > to use the
> > same upper ontology, only those that wish to interoperate with each
> > other. It does not state or imply that there is only one
> > "Common Upper
> > Ontology".
> >
> > I think the statement is more accurate leaving that word in.
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
> (07)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (08)
|