W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > December 2003

Re: Cross-ontologies reasoning

From: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 15:22:47 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200312292022.hBTKMlI01132@pantheon-po03.its.yale.edu>
To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org


> > >    [Frank McCabe]
> > >  The 'problem' I was referring to was that of automatically mapping one
> > >  ontology (written I assume by person or persons A) to another (written
> > >  by persons B).
> > >
> > >  People have asserted that there exist automatic tools for doing that.
> > >  And I was pointing out some corner cases.

> >[me]
> >People are kidding themselves.  

> [Jim Hendler]
> Drew,. I agree completely if we use your definition of 
> ontology-merging.  Partial mappings have a greater
> success (particularly allowing heuristic mechanisms), and of course 
> there's no reason we can't have some human in the loop.  Also, none 
> of the literature I know allows instances to be mapped against 
> multiple ontologies, which is a new idea that occurs easily on the 
> Semantic Web, and which opens many opportunities for new research.
>   So I guess I'm kidding myself

I thought Frank meant "fully automatic tools."  But he never said
which people have asserted their existence, so perhaps the
automatic-tool believer is a straw man.

By the way, ontology merging includes the case of partial mapping,
unless we're talking past each other again.  Most of a merged ontology
just consists of imported piles of uncontroversial symbols from all
of the component ontologies involved.

                                             -- Drew

-- 
                                   -- Drew McDermott
                                      Yale Computer Science Department
Received on Monday, 29 December 2003 15:26:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:48 GMT