Mike and Nicola, (01)
Something more than just a UO is needed: (02)
MU>> True. The difficulty is if there is no explicit ontology
> or schema for a given application, then there is nothing that
> can be mapped TO a common UO. Hence, what is the value of
> a UO in this case? (03)
NG> Clearly almost zero, in this case. Maybe an UO can help
> "reverse engineering" the implicit conceptualization, though. (04)
As I've been saying from day 1, there is something more important
than a UO: a framework that can accommodate any and every
ontology that anyone has had, will have, or wants to have, and
can relate them to one another. (05)
John (06)
_________________________________________________________________
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)
|