Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Generative Methodology Glass Bead Games
On the limits of the OWL standard à [184]
Reading material [1]
Reading material [2]
Reading material [3]
Summary of the discussion up to this point à [186]
Dialogue about natural ontology and mapping to Information Models
Dick (Ballard),
Because we have talked many hours about issues related to theory and information, I have a sense that your work deserves to be an exemplar of one of four categories.
1) Information Models using UML or object oriented design (I put UML into the OOD category)
2) Relational Databases based on Codd’s work (this is the defacto standard for information organization and persistence)
3) Descriptive logic based ontology, such as KIF, Protégé Frames (CLIPS) or RDF/RDFS/OWL
4) N-ary based ontological modeling
As is demonstrated by perhaps 200 of the over 2000 beads in the BCNGroup Glass Bead Games, you and I have had extensive discussions about the differences between triples of the form
< a, r, b>
where a and b are locations in a semantic space, and r is a relational operator, and n-aries of the form
< r, a(1), a(2), a(3), . . . a(n) >
There are some issues that are unresolved between you and I, mostly about the nature of “r”.
But these are details, as far as I am concerned, perhaps you agree?