Re: SUO: ontology areas for review
----- Original Message -----
From: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>
To: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@bestweb.net>; "John Bateman"
<bateman@uni-bremen.de>
Cc: "Adam Pease" <apease@ks.teknowledge.com>;
<standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: SUO: ontology areas for review
>
> From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@bestweb.net>
>
> > IFF is an effort in that direction, but it has not been tested on
> > actual content and applications. Having at least two rich content
> > ontologies, such as OpenCyc and SUMO, should bring to the fore
> > the question of how they can be mixed, matched, and used together.
>
> I would like to propose a challenge for IFF. Make a real application that
> would read in OpenCyc\CycL and write out SUMO\Kif and\or visa versa. If
IFF
> is what I think it is, then this should be possible .. if it isn't then
what
> good is it?
OK. I agree. But in general (see the IFF architecture and discussion
<http://suo.ieee.org/IFF/versions/20020102/IFFFoundationOntology.htm>) any
processing at the object level will need to use a lower metalevel module,
and of course there aren't any as of yet. So in particular what you propose
will need to wait until the IFF Model Theory Ontology is released (the first
version will be released sometime in March 2002). As I mentioned to
Pierluigi Miraglia http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/suo/email/msg07803.html,
any object level ontology, expressed in a language having the features of
many-sorted logic and the orientation of conceptual graphs, should be easily
handled. The translation can use the semantical terminology of the IFF Model
Theory Ontology.
Robert E. Kent
rekent@ontologos.org