Actions

Ontolog Forum

Revision as of 15:37, 28 August 2021 by imported>KennethBaclawski (→‎Resources)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Session Universal Query Language
Duration 1 hour
Date/Time 11 August 2021 16:00 GMT
9:00am PDT/12:00pm EDT
5:00pm BST/6:00pm CEST
Convener KenBaclawski

Universal Query Language

Agenda

Conference Call Information

  • Date: Wednesday, 11 August 2021
  • Start Time: 9:00am PDT / 12:00pm EDT / 6:00pm CEST / 5:00pm BST / 1600 UTC
  • Expected Call Duration: 1 hour
  • The Video Conference URL is https://bit.ly/3rTKSGQ
    • Meeting ID: 881 4427 2329
    • Passcode: 553714
  • Chat Room: https://bit.ly/37g93pC
    • If the chat room is not available, then use the Zoom chat room.
  • One tap mobile

Attendees

Discussion

[12:28] Douglas R Miles: Questions for John: Are two quantifiers enough (donkey quantifiers?)

[12:40] MikeBennett: Surely much of the 'fuzziness' can be solved by distinguishing (a) 'Seat' - something you sit on, and (b) 'chair': something built for sitting on

[12:41] ToddSchneider: Mike, yes. To what level of detail is an entity distinguished.

[12:43] Jacob Friedman: including intension/extension

[12:44] AlexShkotin: chair is hard https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chair

[12:45] Ram D. Sriram: @John Sowa: Do you have any references of the use of Zachman framework for ontology development.

[12:45] ToddSchneider: Ram,

[12:46] ToddSchneider: Ram, the usual interrogatives (i.e., who, what, where, when, ...) are themselves effective analysis tools for ontology development.

[12:48] BobbinTeegarden: John, how do you model context (w w w w w + h)? You showed Which (not part of the w+h string) and Why, where are the others?

[12:48] Douglas R Miles: speaking of 'fuzziness', it would be nice that people could give a value that says how far an instance is from the prototypical

[12:49] Douglas R Miles: (of course we have to define the prototypical)

[12:49] Ram D. Sriram: Here is an example of Zachman's framework for Standards Development: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251255745_Towards_a_Methodology_for_Analyzing_Sustainability_Standards_using_the_Zachman_Framework

[12:49] David Eddy: A Zachman Framework IMPLEMENTATION.... https://tdan.com/semantics-in-metadata-repository-and-systems-integration-efforts/6123

[12:49] David Eddy: The implementer was a Marine.

[12:50] David Eddy: I was never able to get John Zachman to talk about that bottom, implementation row.

[12:50] AlexShkotin: https://www.zachman.com/about-the-zachman-framework

[12:51] RaviSharma: Hello chat is accessible to me now

[12:52] RaviSharma: David - the reason is that implemented enterprise is a living changing and organization practices based "living" thing?

[12:53] ToddSchneider: Bobbin, One approach to 'context' is use of the notion 'relevance'. What is 'relevant' to the 'immediate' entities or processes of interest (at a particular spatio-temporal extent)

[12:54] David Eddy: @Ravi... obviously formally capturing change is an essential ingredient for success

[12:57] David Eddy: Goes without saying Zachman "cell" framework is the language used in each cell tends to be somewhat unique. Something of a challenge to the base concept of "universal."

[12:59] BobbinTeegarden: @Todd, thanks interesting... but how do you physically model 'relevance' or context...?

[13:00] BobbinTeegarden: By the way, John Zachman was looking for help in turning his boxes into an ontology, any takers? Mike Bennett and I were talking to him about it a few years ago...

[13:01] Douglas R Miles: An important part of a "query language" is when a "Select person from table1 where bornAfter 1950" (loves ?J Mary) if the binding of both of these should be considered the same people or not

[13:02] Douglas R Miles: (FromDatabase "Joe") vs JoeTheGuy should be unifiable

[13:03] ToddSchneider: Bobbin, ahhh .... Details. 'Relevance' can be modeled as a numerical value between 0 and 1 (similar to a probability, if not explicitly a probability). But 'Relevance' also depends on the object/subject of focus (i.e. what is of interest) and another (potentially relevant) entity.

[13:06] RaviSharma: Zachman - framework which deals with all types of tools from requirements to systems that run enterprises as in defense, manufacturing, in and then I asked my Q to John

[13:06] RaviSharma: john will send references

[13:07] RaviSharma: john- each specialization will be thru dialog, tools in framework etc

[13:08] RaviSharma: same dialog at each level for 6 rows

[13:11] RaviSharma: john- jcl, cobol, etc legacy to do software re engineering Arun and Andre - Tailored to derive ontology and find relations? Accenture estimates were 80 human years

[13:12] RaviSharma: john was able to have these two persons do it in few weeks with ontogies, NLP, etc level.

[13:15] RaviSharma: developing a general dialogue system

[13:15] Andrew Dougherty: D3WA+ ?

[13:15] RaviSharma: simplifying to QA level

[13:16] RaviSharma: people in Enterprise can talk about computer or language

[13:16] RaviSharma: john's comments above

[13:17] BobbinTeegarden: Isn't Zachman more oriented towards the process, not the data (ontology) side of the business?

[13:17] BobbinTeegarden: You go ahead and ask...

[13:18] RaviSharma: john cited reference for Bobbin link.

[13:19] RaviSharma: a link in his references list.

[13:20] David Eddy: ... & humans will ask a silent question by raising an eyebrow...

[13:22] RaviSharma: Thanks Ken, we need to tie UQL with KG SQL?

Added later by KenBaclawski: @RaviSharma: KGSQL is specified in DOL, which ties KGSQL with UQL. KGSQL is also specified with denotational semantics which is useful for directly implementing KGSQL. I have a translation to SPARQL. which could also be used for implementing KGSQL. Incidentally, the reason why I asked for the CLIP specification in DOL is so that I could develop a translation to CLIP.

[13:22] RaviSharma: thanks

[13:22] BobbinTeegarden: John, are you building us a tool to do the interaction within a DOL framework?

[13:23] Douglas R Miles: Problem is these great Natural Language Understanding stuff is kept locked up

[13:23] janet singer: The topic Formal Ontology as Computer Artifact that Alex suggested would be a way to concretize issues raised here. The terms syntax, semantics, pragmatics are helpfully clarified by understanding that humans and machines both play roles in the artifaction context.

Resources

Retrieved from "https://ontologforum.com/index.php?title=ConferenceCall_2021_08_11&oldid=3956"