- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 07:51:10 -0800
- To: Asankhaya Sharma <asankhaya@yahoo.com>, semantic-web@w3.org
Asankhaya Sharma wrote: > HI, > > I am sorry but i dont understand the irony of "good" > and "dead".. > can you throw some light on it... There is an old pejorative phrase from Western Movies: "The only good Indian is a dead Indian." One problem with ontologies is that they foster hierarchical attitudes towards how things get classified. To many of us, they ALWAYS have "cracks" in them through which fall the "tags" we find more suitable as index/annotation bases. The original to which I used the phrase had the implication that there were "proper" or "authorized" ontologies that should have some preferential priority instead of some method of tagging that was more "folksonomic". I have a history of questioning authority, particularly when it comes to what might become de facto standards for categorizing knowledge. The terms included in ontologies are often "maps without territory" and tend to impose their existence on the organization of knowledge bases. Love.
Received on Friday, 16 December 2005 15:51:04 UTC