Well put John.
As a user, it is very important to have something that can be pulled off
the shelf quickly which Adam wants.
It is also possible for this to be one of possibly several pre-assembled
UOs. (01)
Mike (02)
-----Original Message-----
From: John F. Sowa [mailto:sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:36 PM
To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
Subject: Re: [uos-convene] requested comment on the communique (03)
Adam, (04)
The option of having a collection of modules (call it a library,
registry, lattice or whatever) does *not* preclude the option of having
preassembled versions, such as Cyc, SUMO, Dolce, etc. (05)
AP> In fact, the characterization of "monolithic" ontologies
> seems to me just pejorative since SUMO, Cyc and DOLCE all > have
their different approaches to modularity. (06)
Fine. We can call it whatever you like, but we should document all the
choices, put them in a registry, and let the users decide. (07)
AP> I don't think we need building blocks, but rather an
> integrated and common standard. Building blocks require > further
assembly. (08)
We can have *both*. Right now, we have several "candidates", and none
of the developers have shown the slightest inclination to adopt any of
the others in preference to their own. (09)
If we have a registry of ontologies, we can include big ones and little
ones -- tiny modules and larger composites. For each one, the metadata
can show all pertinent information that may help users decide which to
choose: (010)
1. Who defined, tested, and used each one. What is its
complete development history with full documentation. (011)
2. What modules, if any, were included in it, and which
composites contain it as one component. (012)
3. How is it related to other alternatives, as a generalization,
specialization, relabeling, or combination of some other(s). (013)
4. If it is incompatible with other options, what are the
advantages and disadvantages of the alternatives. Under
what conditions might one prefer one or the other. (014)
In effect, the registry becomes a complete catalog of all ontologies --
big composites and smaller modules -- with all relevant documentation,
including the complete history of development and use. Any user can add
metadata to the registry to document experience, positive and negative,
with any of the big composites or smaller building blocks. (015)
Instead of endless arguments, we can make all options available and let
the users decide. If there is an advantage to using a particular
ontology, the users will gravitate to it and will leave an audit trail
of their choices and experiences. (016)
John Sowa (017)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (018)
|