Formal description of an ontology

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Formal description of an ontology

Julian Vincent-3
Can someone help me write a formal definition / review of an ontology, please. I’ve had a go at it, copying the format I’ve seen in various papers, but I’d be grateful for a critical review to point out problems and omissions.

Thanks
Julian Vincent
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Formal description of an ontology

Luis Enrique Ramos García
Hi Julian, 

what do you understand as a "formal ontology"?


Luis 

El mar., 16 abr. 2019 a las 6:31, Julian Vincent (<[hidden email]>) escribió:
Can someone help me write a formal definition / review of an ontology, please. I’ve had a go at it, copying the format I’ve seen in various papers, but I’d be grateful for a critical review to point out problems and omissions.

Thanks
Julian Vincent
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user

_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Formal description of an ontology

Julian Vincent-4
It’s not the ontology that’s ‘formal’, it’s the description.
In other words, in the description of an ontology there are certain components which are expected, such as the basic structure, other ontologies that have been used, etc. So I’ve tried to produce a fairly complete description, but would be grateful for someone to review it. 

Julian

On 16 Apr 2019, at 11:41, Luis Enrique Ramos García <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Julian, 

what do you understand as a "formal ontology"?


Luis 

El mar., 16 abr. 2019 a las 6:31, Julian Vincent (<[hidden email]>) escribió:
Can someone help me write a formal definition / review of an ontology, please. I’ve had a go at it, copying the format I’ve seen in various papers, but I’d be grateful for a critical review to point out problems and omissions.

Thanks
Julian Vincent
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user


_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Formal description of an ontology

Michael DeBellis-2
Julian, what I usually think of when I hear the word “formal” is some type of mathematical/logical definition.  Since OWL is an implementation of Description Logic which is a subset of First Order Logic I think of any OWL ontology as already being a formal model. But I think I get what you are doing, some more abstract but still formal model that summarizes the ontology(?) I have a fair amount of experience with formal spec languages although it’s pretty dated. If you want to send what you have to me or perhaps just post it to the list (in case others want to give their feedback) I would be happy to take a look. If the actual ontology isn’t too large it would probably be a good idea to send it as well. Today is going to be pretty busy but I could get back to you by end of day tomorrow.

Michael 


On Apr 16, 2019, at 4:30 AM, Julian Vincent <[hidden email]> wrote:

It’s not the ontology that’s ‘formal’, it’s the description.
In other words, in the description of an ontology there are certain components which are expected, such as the basic structure, other ontologies that have been used, etc. So I’ve tried to produce a fairly complete description, but would be grateful for someone to review it. 

Julian

On 16 Apr 2019, at 11:41, Luis Enrique Ramos García <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Julian, 

what do you understand as a "formal ontology"?


Luis 

El mar., 16 abr. 2019 a las 6:31, Julian Vincent (<[hidden email]>) escribió:
Can someone help me write a formal definition / review of an ontology, please. I’ve had a go at it, copying the format I’ve seen in various papers, but I’d be grateful for a critical review to point out problems and omissions.

Thanks
Julian Vincent
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user

_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user

_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Formal description of an ontology

Luis Enrique Ramos García
Hi Julian, 

As Michael told you, and as I know, in ontological engineering, an ontology is formalized when it is implemented in a formal language, with  a given logic.

I also understand the idea of formalization you explained, surely Michael and me, and any other member of this community would be happy to give you feed back. 

Bets regards


Luis Ramos 

 

El mar., 16 abr. 2019 a las 11:41, Michael DeBellis (<[hidden email]>) escribió:
Julian, what I usually think of when I hear the word “formal” is some type of mathematical/logical definition.  Since OWL is an implementation of Description Logic which is a subset of First Order Logic I think of any OWL ontology as already being a formal model. But I think I get what you are doing, some more abstract but still formal model that summarizes the ontology(?) I have a fair amount of experience with formal spec languages although it’s pretty dated. If you want to send what you have to me or perhaps just post it to the list (in case others want to give their feedback) I would be happy to take a look. If the actual ontology isn’t too large it would probably be a good idea to send it as well. Today is going to be pretty busy but I could get back to you by end of day tomorrow.

Michael 


On Apr 16, 2019, at 4:30 AM, Julian Vincent <[hidden email]> wrote:

It’s not the ontology that’s ‘formal’, it’s the description.
In other words, in the description of an ontology there are certain components which are expected, such as the basic structure, other ontologies that have been used, etc. So I’ve tried to produce a fairly complete description, but would be grateful for someone to review it. 

Julian

On 16 Apr 2019, at 11:41, Luis Enrique Ramos García <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Julian, 

what do you understand as a "formal ontology"?


Luis 

El mar., 16 abr. 2019 a las 6:31, Julian Vincent (<[hidden email]>) escribió:
Can someone help me write a formal definition / review of an ontology, please. I’ve had a go at it, copying the format I’ve seen in various papers, but I’d be grateful for a critical review to point out problems and omissions.

Thanks
Julian Vincent
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user

_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user

_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user