Re: The first vocabulary set is here! please take a few minutes to give feedback

Rovetto

I have explained the work in hand, the motivation, and the tasks I am
inviting others to contribute to

If you have something else in mind feel free to go ahead, share your drafts
!

PDM

On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 8:32 PM <ontologos@protonmail.com> wrote:

> I see. Then I recommend taking an approach that begins on the working
> group's topical focus (Knowledge rep), rather than going down the rabbit
> hole of highly abstract concepts and upper ontologies. Focus on the domain.
> If more abstract terms are desired or needed (with justification) then we
> can assert them and define them to suit the project. But starting the other
> way around can introduce avoidable delays and confusions.
>
> During my last studies (philosophy degree with knowledge rep), a focus was
> on them, so I am a specialist in abstracta, those models, and conceptual
> analysis, but they often leads to distractions, confusions, semantic bloat,
> contentious arguments, and there is both ethical and technical reasons to
> avoid them [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-022-01563-3].
>
>
> On Thursday, June 26th, 2025 at 11:48 AM, Paola Di Maio <
> paoladimaio10@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thank you Rovetto for looking at the spreadsheet and for asking pertinent
> questions
>
> The set is intended a a vocabulary that describes the knowledge domain
> 'upper ontologies'
>
> The main criterion for inclusion of terms is : is it a class, a category,
> a property , an attribute or element of
> *any upper ontology?
>
> Another criterion is: is there useful term of reference that describes or
> relates to upper/top level ontologies
> as justified by a use case
>
> So basically, you can comment/annotate as you like (please use suggestion
> mode, do not delete)
> and if you think a term is useful to a particular use case, make the case
>
> I ll be deleting a few of the more generic terms that I realize are not
> very representative and simply have not had
> the time to filter out yet
>
> PDM
>
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 7:28 PM <ontologos@protonmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Paola,
>>
>> I looked at the spreadsheet. My input is:
>>
>>    - Questions and Considerations to Set the Stage:
>>    - Scope of the project and vocabulary to develop. Does it need more
>>       narrowing? (worry about boiling the ocean) Consider my attached KR diagrams.
>>       - From Generic to Specific: What degree of abstraction is desired?
>>       - Consider: Some terms in the spreadsheet are probably too broad
>>       and abstract for the vocabulary's KR scope... unless we develop bespoke
>>       definitions that narrows them.
>>
>>
>> Robert(o) Rovetto
>> --
>> *I specialize in 3 disciplines. This email address is for 1. Contact
>> about the other 2.*
>> -
>> Open to employment, Funding/Sponsors for Personal Projects, & PhD
>> Studentship options.
>> -
>> https://knowledgemodeling.setmore.com/ (Direct Hire)
>> http://ontologforum.org/index.php/RobertRovetto (Ontology profile)
>> https://ontospace.wordpress.com/ (Sample Knowledge Modeling Project)
>> purl.org/wavespace-photography (Photography)
>> On Monday, June 23rd, 2025 at 6:43 PM, Paola Di Maio <
>> paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I promised a first version of the AI KR vocab by the end of Q1 2-25.
>> I am now beginning to release the vocab subsets, divided by subdomain
>> domain
>>
>> [image: AI KR VOCABS.jpg]
>>
>> Here a narration video for the slides that explains them
>>
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uZAw90qx1tPDbnVfGBSRCK260q-i8tzI/view?usp=sharing
>>
>> Here the slides where you may be able to open the links
>>
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uZAw90qx1tPDbnVfGBSRCK260q-i8tzI/view?usp=sharing
>>
>> Please let me know if anything is unclear, or just
>> Send feedback,
>>
>> Have a great beginning of summer
>>
>> Paola
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>