ONT Re: Data Models, Ontologies, Logic
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
MW = Matthew West
MW: Yes, schema is one of the posher ways of talking about data models.
Data model is the common term though, amongst most practitioners
of the art, so it is probably worth getting used to it if you
wish to communicate with those folk.
Matthew,
I 'was' one of those folk -- we just used other words in my millennium.
My interest here is how to communicate with some folk beyond 'we' folk.
This subject touches on issues dear to my heart,
on which I have been working for quite a while.
I'm a really slow learner, but I've put enough
time in to figure out a couple of things here.
If we ever get really serious about using a "logical looking language" (L^3)
to describe or to "model" the real world, then we will start looking at the
ways of those who are currently doing the best job of it, and, sad to say,
that ain't many logicians of the current crop. So I will yield to the
ways of those who are doing almost all of the real work here, if I can.
That will take us beyond the Spheres of DBA's and La Cage Aux FOL's.
Anyway, I did make an earnest plea to relax the jargon for a while.
If it's jargon you want ... don't blame me this time.
Let me repeat my "insight model" here, so at least one of us doesn't forget it:
| It would also be a good idea if we stopped every now and then to think about
| why we gather data and why we make up theories in the first place. We might
| just find that there are more ways to think about this than we have been led
| to believe, and we might just find better ways to talk about the real issues.
Jon Awbrey
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o