- From: Howard Burrows <hburrows@supportingresearch.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 08:28:56 -0500
- To: <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <7D4E507DF6EB498B8711EF3D2E3B6849@Quacky>
Hi, My question about SCOS (Simple Concept Organization Scheme) came from this view: a system that purports to organize "knowledge" should help organize answers. It should help us choose between the applicability of expressed statements. Antoine raises the issue with his use of the term "epistemological level". Epistemological levels are not in the ontological narrower/broader, class/subclass arena. Epistemological levels occur in a ranked list of types of justifications and warrants. As a simplest example, consider the question: "Did Jack push Jill, or did Jill push Jack?" We can express the two answering statements with triples: "Jack pushed Jill" and "Jill pushed Jack". But it seems like we require something else entirely to provide the supporting research that determines if either one is true. Both a SCOS and a SKOS will need to handle the psychological, cultural, and philosophical nuance noted in the earlier discussion. However, if our current scheme only helps us find ideas, it seems more like a "concept" scheme and SCOS. I don't think we get to call it a "knowledge" scheme until we capture statements together with the structures that relate them to their appropriate use. Howard Burrows Supporting Research Durham, NH, USA
Received on Tuesday, 4 November 2008 13:30:07 UTC