- From: <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 18:59:50 +0700
- To: public-xg-eiif <public-xg-eiif@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <c09b00eb0811210359t1b5f6f07g72741489fcc8ef8@mail.gmail.com>
Gary, and all can you you please repeat the question that you had in commenting the paragraph 'toward common ontology'? When I first joined this group, the word *ontology* itself was avoided, to avoid entering in the realm of the ' too abstract and complicated' to be useful. Obviously members of this incubator have become more comfortable using the term since we started and, inevitably now we have to become semantically more precise. So, if we have to talk about ontology in our draft framework document, this would be a good time to start doing so properly. At the moment what we have is a schema, which in itself it would be great to have, because ultimately, in a functinal sense, that's what we need to make the information flow a bit more coherent , functional and efficient. To make sure that our schema is compatible with the grand scheme of things, and universals and primitives, may require some additional refinement of our conceptual model. This will result in our schema to be more versatile robust and consistent and much more useful in time. Please share your thoughts with us, and let's ponder what choices we have to confront to move our work up to the metaphysical ladder (hehe, joking) Guido Vetere who has recently joined this group said that he is going to send some considerations and suggestions on how to model our schema to comply with DOLCE, http://www.loa-cnr.it/Papers/DOLCE2.1-FOL.pdf which I very much look forward to seeing his contribution Gary, which foundational ontology have you worked with before? What would be your suggestions to align our work with top level categories of sorts? I think it is a challenge for bottom up schemas (what we are doing now) to comply with foundational requirements, as well as it is a chellenge for foundational ontologies to be adopted/applied in bottom up schemas creation So starting thinking in terms of ontology proper is an interesting and important exercise that we cannot longer postpone and hopefully we'll learn what we need to learn along the way pdm -- Paola Di Maio School of IT MFU.ac.th *********************************************
Received on Friday, 21 November 2008 12:00:28 UTC