Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission
of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Figure 11. Factor to parent ontology
O1
C1
O2 O3
O4
Figure 10. Resolve conflicts by redesigning the organizations of ontologies
O1
C
O2 O3
O4
C
information will be lost. If O9 explicitly mentions that O9 uses the C4 in O3, the
information of the C4 in O1 can not be inherited by O9, which is a loss of information.
The second option to process this conflict is rename the C4 in either O3 or O9
or both; in this way, all the information can be kept without lost.
3. Redesigning the organizations of ontologies (e.g. factoring)
We use the ontology hierarchies shown in Figure 10 to introduce this conflict resolving
approach. The two Cs in ontologies O2 and O3 have the same semantics, and they
have the same name. Obviously, there will be confusion when O4 inherits C from
O2 and O3. In ontology design, the semantics of each concept in the ontology should
be clear without any ambiguities because the concepts are shared by the Semantic
Web or e-business applications for semantic information processing.
Pages:
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483