Principles of ICT Democracy: can communities themselves build their ontologies ?


The second-generation Web (2.0) is a complex socio-technical system of unforeseen growth and dynamics. On-line communities emerge and interact all around a usually self-organising manner supported by interactive applications, including bookmarking, tagging, blogging, and wikis, being developed and shared at little or no cost.  The emerging range of Semantic Web and other open technologies promises an increase in scale and maturity of knowledge sharing, achieved through collaboration and integration within and between diverse communities.

Considering the current pace of social and technological development, it seems that the transformation of the Web from a network of separately siloed applications and content repositories to a more seamless and semantically interoperable ecosystem is at hand, opening a wide range of scientific challenges and opportunities. However, while simple, the idea of the Semantic Web remains largely unrealised.

Semantic interoperability is the ability of two or more information systems or their (computerised) components to communicate data and to interpret the information in the data that has been communicated both in a meaningful manner, that is by means of an ontology that is shared by the involved information systems.

The ontologies that will furnish the Semantic Web are lacking, and those few that have been published are usually not based on consensus, and hence unreliable and not reusable beyond individual purposes. Of those domain vocabularies that are published on the Web, only some of them are actively maintained and thus reflect the current domain. Many others are rather outdated prototypes, not “usable and reusable”, and unworthily categorised ontologies as an agreement on the schema vocabulary is non-existing. Current techniques that claim to create semantic interoperability are unsatisfactory, both theoretically and as far as the quality of the results is concerned. In current ontology engineering practice, the underlying methodological pinciples are mostly ignored.

In current ontology engineering practices, the underlying methodological principles are mostly ignored. Furthermore, they systemically disregard the subtle gap that looms between knowledge sharing among people at the community/social level on the one hand; and information exchange between computer systems at the operational/technical level (see figure below).

The gap between knowledge sharing between human beings as an act of socialisation and information exchange between computer systems.

The gap between knowledge sharing between human beings as an act of socialisation and information exchange between computer systems.

Architecting community-driven internet systems will require a paradigm shift that goes beyond mere technological fits. In order to bridge the gap between the social and technical part of the community, one must put into practice the necessary activities to identify common needs from socialisation activities and bring the stakeholders together to find and ontological agreement to support these needs.

Community-based ontology evolution establishes the co-evolution of (A)  social interactions enabled by the community’s design; (B) the information systems that support them; and (C) the semantic patterns to fulfil semantic interoperability between these systems.

In order to enact this co-evolution we start from the following seven principles that every approach should keep in mind:

  1. ICT Democracy An ontology should be defined by its community, and not by a single developer.
  2. Autonomy Semantic interoperability requirements emerge autonomously from community evolution processes.
  3. Co-evolution Ontology evolution processes are driven by the changing semantic interoperability requirements.
  4. Perspective Rendering Ontology evolution processes must reflect the various stakeholders’ perspectives.
  5. Perspective Unification In building the common ontology, relevant parts of the various stakeholder perspectives serve as input for the unified perspective.
  6. Validation The explicit rendering of stakeholders perspectives allows us to capture the ontology evolution process completely, and validate the ontology against these perspectives respectively.
  7. Satisfaction Ultimately, co-evolving communities with their ontology will increase overall stakeholder satisfaction.

Community/business semantics management is our approach to enact community-based ontology evolution.

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , ,

6 Responses to “Principles of ICT Democracy: can communities themselves build their ontologies ?”

  1. The pervasive impedance mismatch between Business and IT « pieter de leenheer Says:

    […] pieter de leenheer condensing fact from the vapour of nuance « Principles of ICT Democracy: can communities themselves build their ontologies ? […]

  2. Principles of ICT Democracy: can communities themselves build their ontologies ? Says:

    […] post was originally published on https://deleenheer.wordpress.com/2009/03/04/principles-of-ict-democracy/ No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post) This entry was posted in Collibra. Bookmark […]

  3. The pervasive impedance mismatch between Business and IT Says:

    […] against these perspectives respectively, and finally increase overall satisfaction (see my Principles for ICT Democracy for more). No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post) This entry was posted in Collibra […]

  4. Social Semantics, Hybrid Ontologies and the Tri-Sortal Internet « pieter de leenheer Says:

    […] between them with real-world (business) semantics. This vision is also perfectly in line with the principles of IT democracy implemented by […]

  5. Social Semantics, Hybrid Ontologies and the Tri-Sortal Internet Says:

    […] between them with real-world (business) semantics. This vision is also perfectly in line with the principles of IT democracy implemented […]

  6. Pieter De Leenheer Says:

    Reblogged this on pieter de leenheer and commented:

    The early days of data governance

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: