Hi Dan,
Love Sowa's book on Knowledge Representation. However, in his
discussion, he put up the top level ontology as an example for teaching
purposes. It is not fully developed in terms of coherence and
discrimination. He even discusses some of the issues with the model,
e.g. occurent and continant.
DanR
Dan Corwin wrote:
Dan Russler wrote:
Actually, this list might be too long!
Many of these break down on utility, at least on "easy to define and
decide."
Definitions for these discriminants are easy to find,
in the same way one finds ontologies at levels 1, 2...
I have adapted (and I recommend) those of John Sowa.
http://www.jfsowa.com/ontology/toplevel.htm
Deciding is something that needs to be done for each
term in each ontology, by its publisher. If it does
not happen explicitly, concepts get conflated, which
becomes a huge source of confusion later for others.
Declaring which discriminants apply to each term must
become part of the minimum level of documentation that
SW deems acceptable for published ontologies.
Without it, ontology concepts will stay undefined along
at least one fundamental semantic dimension. That lets
people (mis)use them, so they inevitably will, which is
exactly counter to *the* core goal for any ontology.
Hard or easy, the utility gained fully merits its costs.
best regards,
Dan Corwin
Kashyap, Vipul wrote:
Physical vrs Informational
Natural vrs Artificial
Real vrs Imaginary
Composite vrs Characteristic
Individual vrs Collective
Atomic vrs Mediating
Specific vrs Indefinite
Continuant vrs Occurrent
Not many discriminants can be found which are simultaneously
orthogonal (independent of one another) and general (can be applied
to anything) and useful (easy to clearly define and decide). The
listing above may in fact be nearly complete (although many would
debate its specifics or suggest other candidates).
Regardless of the particulars, I suggest that a better /semantic/
model for your "layer 0" would be all and only those discriminants
which have all three qualities - independence, generality, and
utility - and hence can be employed to help define any class or
instance desired.
[VK] Thanks, Dan! This is a very good guideline and framework to
work from.
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 Compliance HelpLine at
800-856-1983 and
properly dispose of this information.