Re: SUO: RE: CYC event vs. SUMO Process -- really different?
Erik,
I agree with you that a vote at some time after reasonable
discussion will be necessary when no unanimity is evident.
That is how I suggest we proceed with this thread I have
started. I also encourage others to start alternative
threads if they feel that a different methodology or
different starting point is better. I will try to
participate in as many working threads as physically
possible. I think that multiple threads can be
useful.
Pat
=============
Erik Larson wrote:
> Pat,
> On point 2. below Guarino has noted (sorry I don't have the reference
> handy) that there isn't any consensus in the existing foundational
> ontologies (SUMO, OpenCyc, DOLCE, etc.) There are basic philosophical
> differences (e.g., between scientific-engineering definitions and
> cognitive or "common sense" ones) that divide foundational ontologies on
> important terms such as "Event" from the outset. So there isn't likely
> to be a consensus as long as the members of the group don't share a
> common set of philosophical assumptions. Point blank. (If you are
> tempted to disagree, have a look at the last couple years of discussions
> on this list.)
>
> What I suggest is that the group forces a vote on important definitions,
> such as that of "Event." Otherwise, discussion can and will continue
> endlessly. Bringing the matter to a vote will involve the members of
> the group in a process that moves forward and that reflects the ideas of
> the majority.
>
> If there's something wrong with THAT suggestion, and given that harping
> on pet theories based on philosophical biases (themselves codified, in
> many cases, by business interest or personal stake) isn't working, then
> I'm stumped.
>
> Erik
>
> Patrick Cassidy <pcassidy@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> 2. I suggest that we try to find some degree of
> consensus on what would constitute an "Event" in a
> merged ontology, since events (or the 4-D correlate
> "activity") are central to all ontologies dealing
> with real-world problems. If agreement can be found
> on that class, the discussion can be expanded to
> related classes.
> 3. If a different process for building such a merged
> ontology appears preferable to any of the participants,
> I hope they will make a suggestion for the alternative.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL
> <http://pa.yahoo.com/*http://rd.yahoo.com/evt=1207/*http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/>
> - Now only $29.95 per month!
--
=============================================
Patrick Cassidy
MICRA, Inc. || (908) 561-3416
735 Belvidere Ave. || (908) 668-5252 (if no answer)
Plainfield, NJ 07062-2054 || (908) 668-5904 (fax)
internet: cassidy@micra.com
=============================================