I am planning on using a minimum of three separate
technologies, as I am hoping to "triangulate" on the
meaning of the VistA system's implicit meaning for
Files and fields currently stored therein. My current
expectation is that I will be using SUMO, OWL, and
CycL. Each of these technologies has different strengths,
and I hope to learn more about the details about them
with this project. Each set of predicates make different
distinctions, and I hope to find a combination that will
reflect the actual differentiations which the software makes.
As many of you know, I have been interested, and involved
with Cyc for many years, having written the Unofficial FAQ
for Cyc more years in the past than I want to admit in public.
Likewise, I have been a fan of Adam Pease's work on SUMO
since its inception, and have been favorably impressed by
his dedication, and the professionalism of his team, as well
as their generous spirit with the rest of the community.
I have included OWL, primarily on the strength of Protege,
and the work done by Stanford on medical ontologies.
My hope is that this will increase the likelihood that
the result will increase interoperability.
A careful argument that shows strong benefits for the project
might sway me from this plan, but my current thoughts
show that this strategy has the highest degree of utility
for the project and for the community.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment