Re: SUO: Criteria that an ontology must satisfy
Doug,
Those criteria are goals that the T2 ontology effort was
working toward. The SUO by itself won't satisfy them, but
it must build a foundation that can support them.
>Is your intent with these criteria to motivate one ontology, or an
>integrated set of ontologies? I suppose a system of ontologies can
>(should?) be regarded as a single ontology from one point of view. But it
>seems that one of our, as yet unresolved, issues is what we really mean by
>an "upper" ontology. The scope of your criteria seems to imply one
>all-embracing ontology (or set, or system of ontologies). Are there
>criteria that we can further apply that will help us make progress on the
>project of defining an "upper" ontology?
Those criteria wouldn't apply to just an upper ontology,
but to the result of an upper ontology with sufficient work
built on top of it to support the rest.
The question of where the upper ends and the middle or lower
begins is left open.
John Sowa