Re: SUO: a silly question about the new modular architecture
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@bestweb.net>
> It is very common in standards circles to provide a "registry" for
> various kinds of specifications, which may have different levels
> of certification. But I believe that a lattice-based or IFF-based
> framework has an important advantage over traditional registries:
> it provides a method for combining ontologies to generate new
> combinations of the modules upon request.
What is the difference between the 'lattice-based' and the 'IFF-based'
frameworks ?
This is probably unrelated but I can conceive of two different ways that
ontologies can become related.
1) Differentiation - the ontologies were originally the same, and they split
into two.
2) Fusion - the ontologies evolved independently, they were then forced
together for mutual consistency and then differentiated as in (1) above.
Do we have methods to do both of those?
Could we perhaps use a test case: fuse the upper level Cyc with SUMO ?
Seth Russell