Lars, et al,
This is an interesting thread. I'd like to call your attention to a 
group that is taking IBIS to the Web under the rubrics: global 
sensemaking and hypermedia discourse. An entry point is

http://www.globalsensemaking.net/

The notion of applying a speech act ontology to model "moves" in 
recorded (modeled) dialogues is an interesting one. I'm not sure I see 
that as "far more important" than (I presume) the IBIS ontology; that 
might be the key question in an IBIS discussion: "Which is a more 
valuable ontology: IBIS or Speech Acts in the context of recording 
(facilitating) a dialogue?" There might even be a better way to open 
such a dialogue; after all, sensemaking is often about finding the best 
question(s) to ask.

The Compendium Insitutute found at
http://compendiuim.open.ac.uk/institute/
is formed around such matters. Indeed, the Compendium (free, Java) 
dialogue mapping tool uses a simple IBIS ontology; it would be valuable 
to engage people such as Jeff Conklin and Simon Buckingham Shum in a 
dialogue based on the suggestion made here. I suspect that, while I 
would like to contest the assertion that speech act models are more 
important than are IBIS models in the context of hypermedia discourse, 
the assertion is nevertheless an important contribution to the field.

Cheers,
Jack

L. Ludwig wrote:
> Well, 
> 
> In ArtificialMemory, I have implemented an Issue-base Information System
> (http://www.artificialmemory.net/artificialmemory.aspx?ID=17888VT) ontology
> some years ago. But, by now, I think that in order to represent a discussion
> it is far more important to have a speech act ontology and to support the
> individually consistent expression of real and unreal statements. Besides
> others.
> 
> :-)  Lars Ludwig 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> // Message: 1
> // Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 18:31:49 +0100
> // From: Christoph LANGE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> // Subject: [swikig] Cicero [Re: Argumentative (= semantic) discussions
> //    now in  IkeWiki and SWiM]
> // To: [email protected]
> // Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> // Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> //
> // Dear semantic wiki community,
> //
> //   about one month ago I announced the implementation of argumentative
> // discussions using the DILIGENT argumentation ontology in IkeWiki on this
> list.
> // So far I thought that, besides the system presented in ?
> //
> // > C. Tempich, E. Simperl, M. Luczak, R. Studer, and H. S. Pinto.
> // > Argumentation- based ontology engineering. IEEE Intelligent Systems,
> // > 22(6):52?59, 2007.
> 

_______________________________________________
swikig mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/mailman/listinfo/swikig

Reply via email to