Ontology

kinda like a Taxonomy, but with more clauses defining relationships among terms

Oct'2021 Dorian Taylor thread: it is the most organized way to write down a set of conceptual entities and semantic relations and then voilà you can start computing with them... very handy thing to have in your back pocket is lov (https://lov.linkeddata.es/dataset/lov/) which is basically npm for ontologies.... if you write it the proper way (in rdf-a like these guys https://privatealpha.com/ontology/) then the spec is simultaneously human- and machine-readable... vocabs that are obviously useful:

• people http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/
• places https://w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos
• orgs https://w3.org/TR/vocab-org/
• concepts https://w3.org/TR/skos-primer/
• IBIS https://vocab.methodandstructure.com/ibis
• commerce http://heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html#
• samples https://w3.org/TR/vocab-data-cube/
• provenance https://w3.org/TR/prov-o/
• documents (purl is down rn?) https://github.com/structureddynamics/Bibliographic-Ontology-BIBO/
• socialnet stuff http://rdfs.org/sioc/spec/
• no standard for tasks/to-do-list?
  • Dorian's partially-done Process Model Ontology? https://vocab.methodandstructure.com/process-model Yikes it extends IBIS, events, and SKOS, and breaks things down into Goals, Tasks, Methods, Actions, State....
  • https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Domain-and-range-of-task-ontology-properties_tbl2_281777673
  • https://lov.linkeddata.es/dataset/lov/vocabs?q=task

I think in many cases a Shared Language is as far as you're likely to get. And maybe WikiWord/Sister Sites is the right way to capture that.

• 2003-12-13-MacManusWikilogOntology
• 2003-12-18-BlaserAssertionProcessor
• 2003-04-16-WikiwordAsTopic

Maybe MicroFormat is compromise for standardized non-doc data types?

John Wilkins worked on this in the 1600s.

• see essay by Jorge Luis Borges

Related to the Semantic Web?

http://www.corante.com/many/archives/2005/01/25/ontology_as_a_term_of_art.php