The IFOMIS work Dirk, Kirsten, and others have cited on referent tracking is
definitely important work to review in this light. I'd not been familiar with
the model theoretic work Bijan mentions, but clearly that is important.
Werner Ceusters also has a list - a Google list I believe - on referent
tracking.
[VK] We need some clarity on the various issues coming up - updates, revisions,
referent tracking and versioning. I think part of the problem is that we are all
using these terms from different perspectives and a good clear definition of
these terms would be very useful.
This work - and related work on "speech acts" - is most definitely relevant to
this discussion and very specifically is designed to address ABox. As the
citations given indicate, most of this work has been done in the clinical domain
with a focus on patient records, which was the origin of this thread and would
be directly relevant to the Use Case Nigam put out there.
[VK] Could you give us some examples of how speech acts could be used in the
context of Nigam's Use Case?
Standard source version control systems - e.g., CVS, SVN, etc. - just make the
problem worse in my opinion. This is where I'd differ with the point Vipul
makes. It's not that there are NO aspects of the software version process
relevant to this issue. It's just I believe there are complex issues in this
domain - some of which Bijan mentioned - some of which I mention below regarding
application the traditional approach to employing CVs for literature annotation
- that extend greatly beyond what the common practice in software version
control is intended to support. In that domain, highly granular version
management has been required, and I believe something like it will be required
in the ontology development space as well. Perhaps that's just a qualification
and rewording of the point Vipul was trying to make.
[VK] Yes. I did not imply that the techniques for software versioning (still
predominantly text based) carry over to knowledge versioning...
As you can tell, this is just a suggestion which OBI, BIRNLex, and a few other
ontology developers have just begun to implement, so this is most definitely a
work-in-progress.
Having a review of the topic, as Vipul suggests, at this stage in the game by
the several folks who've provided valuable pointers and feedback, would be a
wonderful idea, I think.
[VK] Bill, as Eric Miller used to say, "No good deed goes unpunished!" Could you
lead a discussion on this topic at one of the BIONT Telcons possibly in
collaboration with Dirk Colaert and Kerstin Forsberg?
Thanks for all the work and information.
Cheers,
---Vipul
THE INFORMATION TRANSMITTED IN THIS ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION IS INTENDED ONLY
FOR THE PERSON OR ENTITY TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL
AND/OR PRIVILEGED MATERIAL. ANY REVIEW, RETRANSMISSION, DISSEMINATION OR OTHER
USE OF OR TAKING OF ANY ACTION IN RELIANCE UPON, THIS INFORMATION BY PERSONS OR
ENTITIES OTHER THAN THE INTENDED RECIPIENT IS PROHIBITED. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS
INFORMATION IN ERROR, PLEASE CONTACT THE SENDER AND THE PRIVACY OFFICER, AND
PROPERLY DISPOSE OF THIS INFORMATION.
