- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2004 12:22:02 -0500
- To: "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
On Jan 31, 2004, at 9:11 PM, Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) wrote: > OK, I've heard this term enough and I've just gotta ask ... What is an > "upper level ontology"? It appears from context to have some sort of > pretty specific meaning. Everybody contributing to this discussion > seems > to know it but I sure don't. Crudely, it's the top bits of a class (and relation) tree. Bit less crudely, it's the top bits of a class (and relation) tree that aren't particular domain specific, i.e., are fairly abstract. See: http://www.jfsowa.com/ontology/toplevel.htm for an example with discussion. So, roughly, you might expect all further ontologies (for WSDL, ws-chore) etc. to be defined "in terms of" the upper ontology (WS-A), at least, in the sense, that you'd be subclassing off concepts in the WS-A. I would count WS-A as not a general upper ontology as it's pretty specific to, say, distributed computational systems. Cheers, Bijan Parsia.
Received on Sunday, 1 February 2004 12:22:13 UTC