Re: [unrev-II] DKR/OHS: 5 Authoring Requirements

From: Jack Park (
Date: Mon Feb 21 2000 - 16:23:58 PST

From: "Jack Park" <>

----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Armstrong <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2000 3:38 PM
Subject: Re: [unrev-II] DKR/OHS: 5 Authoring Requirements

> From: Eric Armstrong <>
> Jack Park wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Eric Armstrong <>
> > <vast snippage/>
> > > TBD: Should node types be pre-defined? If they are, it
> > > prevents one person from specifying "Design Idea" while
> > > another specifies "Design Note" or "Design Topic".
> > > Without that regularity, it becomes impossible to ensure
> > > that a query has accessed all the relevant information.
> > > On the other hand, on-going investigations into "wicked
> > > problems" may need to organize as they go. So it may be
> > > best to allow node-type creation on the fly.
> > >
> >
> > It would seem to be prudent, here, to give thought to all the efforts
> > to build an ontology for the web. The underlying notion seems to be
> > that without a consistent ontology, the web might just grow into an
> > unsearchable maze of information. With one, the web might become a
> > gigantic knowledge base.
> >
> > I would suggest that the design process, in every
> > instance possible, look to the idea of an interlingua, a common
> > ontology on which all users can base their actions. Creating node
> > types on the fly, IMHO, flies against the winds of usability.
> >
> > Just my 0.02 euros
> > Jack Park
> >
> Must be inflation. That sure as heck looks like a dollar's worth.
> Your logic appears immpeccable to me.
> Follow up questions:
> * Who/what is pursing the goal of "an ontology for the Web"?
> * Which of the ongology references in the list I sent out
> recently would reccommend most highly? Are there others
> you prefer? Any good books?
If you look into the work of Brian Gaines, especially at (which, at this moment, refused to open),
you will find projects like Sysiphis -- not sure I spelt that rightly, and
many others, most of which have underlying a notion of an ontology. This,
BTW, was one of the links you sent that I later corrected. Lots of papers

Current favorite book is John F. Sowa Knowledge Representation (1999). I'd
also pay attention to the OML/CKML stuff on the web(which may be one of
those you sent). That appears to be category-theoretic in nature, quite
possibly capable of allowing for knowledge bases of the relational kind,
those capable of representing truly complex systems. To follow that idea
further, you might want to look up the many papers by Robert Rosen (see, and back up to Don Mikulecky's
home page to get even deeper into discussions regarding knowledge
representation in truly complex domains. I like Rosen's book Life Itself.
Tough read, though. If you choose to go there, you're opening up what I
consider to be the pandora's box of everything Doug is talking about.

Jack Park

Get what you deserve with NextCard Visa! ZERO! Rates as low as
0.0% Intro APR, online balance transfers, Rewards Points, no
hidden fees, and much more! Get NextCard today and get the credit
you deserve! Apply now! Get your NextCard Visa at:

Community email addresses:
  Post message:
  List owner:

Shortcut URL to this page:

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 18:56:50 PDT