SUO: Latticework Ontology: The Virtues?
Hi,
This question is put primarily to John Sowa, but I'd welcome responses from
anyone with a take on the topic.
I have tried to follow the entire debate on approaches, methodologies and
in particular, the monolithic vs. latticework ontology issue. However, I'm
not entire sure I've absorbed the salient points.
I find myself sympathetic (in a kind of non-specific way, alas) to the
lattice advocates, since as a long-time programmer and software designer, I
know that monolithic systems are problematic for a variety of reasons
stemming directly from their monolithic nature.
Could I get a succinct, synoptic run-down on the purported advantages of
the lattice-of-ontologies approach?
Here are a few things I can think might be the advantages:
- Modularity / Separability
- Composability
- Scalability
- Impact-of-change minimization
- Division of ontology authoring effort
- Accommodation of disparate formalizations
- Inference performance
- Inferential capabilities
A specific I question have about a lattice-structured ontology is whether a
given symbol can be reused in conflicting ways in different
non-overlapping, non-interacting component (sub-) ontologies?
Actually, I can probably think of other questions, but they're quite likely
to be premised on my presumptions about the specific conceptualization of
the lattice-structured ontology approach. I'll hold off enumerating them
until I can get a better idea of why it is being promoted.
Thanks.
Randall Schulz
Mountain View, CA USA