Alignement to DUL Upper Ontology

From Semantic Sensor Network Incubator Group
Revision as of 08:43, 6 June 2011 by Llefort (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Foundational layer


This is a follow -up of the discussion in February and in March. This topic will be revisited soon and put on the agenda of a weekly teleconf, possibly the next one (July 20).
Krzysztof, Michael and Laurent are working together to prepare what will be presented to the group (we are trying to clarify what "alignment" means in this context).

UPDATE: See 20 July 2010 -- Decision to align the SSN ontology with DOLCE Ultra Lite and Skeleton part of the Incubator Report

Object: define how the Semantic Sensor Network Ontology relates to (reuses?) the definitions brought by an upper ontology like DOLCE Ultra Lite.


  • Are there specific SSN ontology user profiles which would like or dislike to have an alignment to an upper ontology?
  • Are there some good reasons to align the SSN ontology to an upper ontology?
  • Is there a sustainable approach where we can maintain the alignement as an optional feature rather than a mandatory feature?

See also: ACTION-13

Background information

SSN XG discussions:

Various versions of DOLCE:

Why we need a top level (claims!):

"Haskell" ontology and related papers/talks

Ontologies and linked data:

Related publications



[Muenster Semantic Interoperability Lab (MUSIL), Institute for Geoinformatics, Muenster University 2006] Semantic Reference Systems (SeReS) PROJECT., Muenster Semantic Interoperability Lab (MUSIL), Institute for Geoinformatics, Muenster University, 2006.

[Brodaric and Probst 2009] B. Brodaric and F. Probst Enabling Cross-Disciplinary E-Science by Integrating Geoscience Ontologies with Dolce. In IEEE Intelligent Systems 24(1), pp. 66-77, 2009.

[Devaraju and Kuhn 2010] A. Devaraju and W. Kuhn A Process-Centric Ontological Approach for Integrating Geo-Sensor Data. In Proceeding of the 2010 conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems, pp. 199-212, 2010.

[Dietze and Domingue 2009] S. Dietze and J. Domingue Bridging between Sensor Measurements and Symbolic Ontologies through Conceptual Spaces. In Proceedings of the 1st SemSensWeb2009 Workshop on the Semantic Sensor Web, 2009.

[Garbacz 2006] P. Garbacz Towards a standard taxonomy of artifact functions. In Applied Ontology, pp. 1-28, 2006.

[Jacuzzo 2009] L. Jacuzzo LBFO: toward an artificial language for ontology development. In Nature Precedings, 2009.

[Kuhn 2009a] W. Kuhn A Functional Ontology of Observation and Measurement. In GeoSpatial Semantics, pp. 26-43, LNCS 5892GeoSpatial Semantics, 2009.

[Kuhn 2009b] W. Kuhn Semantic Engineering In Research Trends in Geographic Information Science. In, pp. 63-76, 2009.

[Masolo et al. 2003] C. Masolo, S. Borgo, A. Gangemi, N. Guarino and A. Oltramari WonderWeb Deliverable D18, Ontology Library (final). Laboratory For Applied Ontology - ISTC-CNR, 2003.

[Niles and Pease 2001] I. Niles and A. Pease Towards a standard upper ontology. In FOIS '01: Proceedings of the international conference on Formal Ontologyin Information Systems, pp. 2-9, 2001.

[Ortmann and Kuhn 2010] J. Ortmann and W. Kuhn Affordances as Qualities. In Proceeding of the 2010 conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems, pp. 117-130, 2010.

[Probst 2006] F. Probst An Ontological Analysis of Observations and Measurements. In In: Proc. of the 4th. International Conference on Geographic Information Science (\GIScience\), pp. 304-320, 2006.

[Probst 2007] F. Probst Semantic Reference Systems for Observations and Measurements.., 2007.

[Probst 2008] F. Probst Observations, measurements and semantic reference spaces. In Applied Ontology, pp. 63-89, 2008.

[Scheider et al. 2009] S. Scheider, K. Janowicz and W. Kuhn Grounding geographic categories in the meaningful environment. In Conference on Spatial Information Theory COSIT 2009, pp. 69-87, 2009.

[Scheider et al. 2010] S. Scheider, F. Probst and K. Janowicz Constructing Bodies and their Qualities from Observations. In Proceeding of the 2010 conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems, pp. 131-144, 2010.

[Smith et al. 2007] B. Smith, M. Ashburner, C. Rosse, W. Bard Jonathanand Bug, W. Ceusters, L. J. Goldberg, K. Eilbeck, A. Ireland, C. J. Mungall, P. R. Leontis Neoclesand Serra, A. Ruttenberg, R. H. Sansone Susanna A. andScheuermann, N. Shah, P. L. Whetzel and S. Lewis The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedicaldata integration. In Nature Biotechnology 25(11), 2007.

[Wombacher and Schneider 2010] A. Wombacher and P. Schneider Observation Centric Sensor Data Model., 2010.