[xtm-wg] Common Assumptions [Was: analysis of the meaning of ontology]

[Murray Altheim <altheim@eng.sun.com>]

Paul Prueitt wrote:
> 
> The Waterson and Preece paper is at:
> 
>  http://www.csd.abdn.ac.uk/~apreece/Pubs/kbsj99b.html
[...]

To step away from this discussion a bit, but glean an important point
for Topic Maps from the above discussion/paper: that the act of merging
two or more topic maps requires (at least at a semantic level) that 
there be some fundamental agreement between the sources prior to merging.
I think the Waterson and Preece paper does provide some valuable insights
that may also be applied in our domain, vis:

  "In order for two or more knowledge-based systems to interoperate - 
   for example, by exchanging knowledge, or collaborating as agents in 
   a co-operative problem-solving process - they must commit to the 
   definitions in a common ontology. Verifying such commitment is 
   therefore a prerequisite for reliable knowledge-based system 
   interoperability."

We don't discuss this type of requirement in our documentation on 
merging, and perhaps we should investigate doing so. I would welcome
further discussion on this topic.

Murray

...........................................................................
Murray Altheim                            <mailto:altheim&#x40;eng.sun.com>
XML Technology Center
Sun Microsystems, Inc., MS MPK17-102, 1601 Willow Rd., Menlo Park, CA 94025

      In the evening
      The rice leaves in the garden
      Rustle in the autumn wind
      That blows through my reed hut.  -- Minamoto no Tsunenobu

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
Click here for more details
http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/337252/_/980749082/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com