<<On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:10:11 +0100, "Martin Hepp \(DERI extern\)" <martin.hepp@deri.org> said: > In the continuum of "one ontology for the world" and "one individual > ontology for everyone", I am much more on your side. Obviously both options are essential. It is important that individuals be able to express their own concepts -- but it can also be frustrating (as I have found) to have no other choice. The "one individual ontology for everyone" is equivalent to "one individual language for everyone", with the same results: it's impossible to communicate your ideas unless you can express them in a way which other people can understand. There are concepts we share in common; if we don't share (at least a limited set of) names for them, we may have no way of discovering that commonality. -GAWollmanReceived on Thursday, 12 January 2006 19:31:28 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:22:39 GMT