Re: SUO: Some comments about Cyc
Robert,
I am happy that you are continuing your work, but I'd like to make
a suggestion: please separate the theoretical foundations of IFF
from what you are proposing as a standard. The theory should go
into a series of technical reports that can be read and understood
on their merits, while the standard should only contain the details
of how the theory affects the interfaces that are used to encode
and use any ontology that has the appropriate structures.
Some comments:
RK> The IFF is big, and version 1.0 (100+ pages) only encoded part of
it: (1)
> the namespace for set-theoretic classes/functions/relations in the IFF Core
> (sub)Ontology, and (2) the IFF Category Theory (sub)Ontology, which is a
> baseline ontology for category theory.
Why is it necessary for you to specify namespaces? That should be
the function of a formalism such as KIF and CGs that is used to
encode the ontologies. If IFF requres features of KIF and CGs
that are not currently being supported, then you should inform
those groups of your needs (or you should join with those groups
to ensure that the appropriate features are provided).
> The next two versions will be further additions (not revisions) to the IFF.
That is frightening. IFF is already too big as it is. Anything that
is purely theoretical should go into the supporting technical reports.
Anything that depends on the notation should go into the KIF and CG
standards.
> I am currently working on version 2.0 (100+ pages), which encodes large
> classifications and their infomorphisms, large concept lattices and their
> morphisms, bonds, bonding pairs, etc. Due out next month.
>
> After that for version 3.0, I will continue work on a Model Theory Ontology
> for Information Flow. Due out later this fall.
While you're doing that, please consider how much you can remove
from the standzrd and put into separate technical reports.
> Currently, I am doing this on my own, without funding.
That was my impression, but anything of this magnitude should be
developed by more than one person (at least one principal plus
a couple of graduate student assistants). And it should be
funded as something more than a hobby.
John