W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > December 2015

Re: Vocabularies to classify terms

From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 23:21:03 +0000 (UTC)
To: Alberto Nogales <anogales81@gmail.com>, <paoladimaio10@googlemail.com>
Cc: <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1470354520.3849806.1451431263503.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
Hi Paola,

//unfortunately, existing categorizasion schemas often mix the two, yak)

I'm good with "yak", but I prefer the more expensive sounding "Reification Fallacy" until checks clear, whether the author can even spell Reification Fallacy or not :)

The real problem is two cases which look similar: 1) (trivial) Redundant Labels (Synonyms) and 2) (not so nice, but extremely popular in the "New Economy") the willful Reification Fallacy, aka how to lead and profit by getting getting paid in advance of delivery.

Sociotechnical System professionals can manage case 1.  When the blizzard hits Madrid this July we'll  need AI equipped robots.



[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reification_%28fallacy%29


--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 12/28/15, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: Vocabularies to classify terms
 To: "Alberto Nogales" <anogales81@gmail.com>
 Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org
 Date: Monday, December 28, 2015, 8:55 PM
 
 Alberto
 
 yr question is about a very
 generic example
 
 afaik, such
 schemas tend to be 'domain' specific, ie, you first
 need
 to identify want domain
 your categories/vocabulary falls under, then
 you can try to find if
 such a set exists
 already in the public domain
 
 By domain it is intended not only
 'knowledge domain' (the specific
 topic you are trying to represent in the cats)
 but also 'system
 domain' (the
 platform/environment the knowledge domain lives in,
 referring more to the cateogirzation of a
 structure rather than its
 contents)
 
 https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Category:Top-level_categories
 
 https://wiki.roll20.net/Category:Top-level_categories
 
 //unfortunately, existing
 categorizasion schemas often mix the two, yak)
 
 
 see
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Fundamental_categories
 
 There are few purely faceted
 classifications; the best known of these
 is
 the Colon Classification of S. R. Ranganathan, a general
 knowledge
 classification for libraries.
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faceted_classification
 
 General top level categories
 are found in Deweys system, which is the
 nearest thing
 I can think of
 based on yr description
 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dewey_Decimal_classes
 
 pdm
 
 On
 12/29/15, Alberto Nogales <anogales81@gmail.com>
 wrote:
 > Dear all, I am searching for
 vocabularies that let me classify terms,
 > something similar to an upper ontology.I
 am explaining that with a term
 > tree.
 Lets imagine that we have the first node that we will
 called
 > "Categories". Then we
 will hace the main categories in the second level of
 > the tree. And following we will have
 subcategories or terms. If a look for
 > a
 term it will be classified by its main category.
 >
 > 1. Categories
 >     1.1 Biology
 >           1.1.1 Cell
 >           1.1.2 Protein
 >           ...
 >           1.1.N Mineral
 >     1.2 Mathematics
 >           1.2.1 Equation
 >            ...
 >           1.2.N Geometry
 >                 
    1.2.N.1 Triangle
 >     
 ....
 >      1.N Physics
 >             1.N.1
 Gravity
 >
 > So in this
 case if a want to classify the term gravity, the answer will
 be
 > Physics. If I want to classify
 triangle, the answer will be Mathematics.
 >
 > Does anyone knows an
 ontology, taxonomy, etc similar to this. I need it to
 > be expressed as rdf, owl or similar.
 > Thanks.
 >
 
Received on Tuesday, 29 December 2015 23:21:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 29 December 2015 23:21:35 UTC