Re: A simplistic definition of "ontology"firstname.lastname@example.org (Pat Hayes)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 1995 15:59:44 -0600
To: email@example.com (Eduard Hovy), firstname.lastname@example.org
From: email@example.com (Pat Hayes)
Subject: Re: A simplistic definition of "ontology"
At 8:41 AM 10/4/95 -0500, Eduard Hovy wrote:
>Just to stir up some blood:
We havn't quite got to THAT stage yet, at least not out here in the midwest.
> An ontology is a collection of symbols that represent (i.e., name) some
> set of phenomena in the "external world" within a computer (or possibly
> within other, non-implemented, systems, although who knows what that
> would be interesting for). Typically, the phenomena include objects
> and processes and states, and typically, these entities are related
> among themselves; usually, the ontology names (some of) these relations.
I think the issue can be focussed by asking whether it is enough to simply
*name* the relations, or should we ask an ontology to somehow *specify*
them. Can the ontology rely on the knowledge of the reader to interpret
what its symbols mean, or should we think of it rather as a vehicle for
representing the knowledge that human users use to do that very
interpreting? I think this tension has been in the ontology community since
the beginning. Coming as I do from the 'knowledge representation' (rather
than the 'glossary') side of the divide, I always wonder just how far away
the other side can be taken to be. My comment which started this exchange
wasnt really asking for a definition (maybe its impossible to give a
*definition* of an ontology which will satisfy everyone) but raising a
doubt, or a question, about whether it is useful to talk of a mere glossary
as being an ontology. Or, to put it another way; if an ontology has no
axioms in it at all, what do we gain by calling it an ontology?
(One obvious answer might be that such a glossary is a useful step along
the way to creating a true ontology, a kind of ontology-sketch, but I dont
think that is how the compilers of such glossaries regard them.)
Beckman Institute (217)244 1616 office
405 North Mathews Avenue (415)855 9043 or (217)328 3947 home
Urbana, Il. 61801 (217)244 8371 fax