This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,108 pending submissions
waiting for review.
If the submission is accepted, then this page will be moved into the article space.
If the submission is declined, then the reason will be posted here.
In the meantime, you can continue to improve this submission by editing normally.
Where to get help
If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews.
If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the
talk page of a
relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed.
To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant
WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags.
Submission declined on 27 January 2023 by Chess (
talk).
The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at
Basic Formal Ontology. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.
This draft's references do not show that the subject
qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about
mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you have not resolved the issues listed above, your draft will be declined again and potentially deleted.
If you need extra help, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors.
Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted.
Where to get help
If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews.
If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the
talk page of a
relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed.
To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant
WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags.
This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review.
Comment: These are good sources for Basic Formal Ontology, but not for the ISO/IEC standard outlining it. You'd be better off creating subsections in
top-level ontology and
Basic Formal Ontology for the ISO/IEC standard. These articles are underdeveloped.We don't need a separate article on the standard itself if the standard is just defining a topic we have an article on already, and said standard hasn't had coverage independent of the topic.
Office Open XML is an example of how this might be done.
Chess (
talk) (please use {{
reply to|Chess}} on reply) 13:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Comment: Thank you for including references in your submission. Please help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the
draft's talk page, the
WP:THREE best sources that establish
notability of the subject. ~
Kvng (
talk) 03:32, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Comment: (a) The lead needs a one-sentence, plain-English explanation of what this is (b) many / most of the sources are not independent.
Stuartyeates (
talk) 04:51, 13 November 2022 (UTC)Done
Stuartyeates
Comment: (a) The lead needs a one-sentence, plain-English explanation of what this is (b) many / most of the sources are not independent.
Stuartyeates (
talk) 04:51, 13 November 2022 (UTC)Done
Stuartyeates
ISO/IEC 21838 was developed by Subcommittee 32 for Data Management and Interchange,[7] of the ISO and IEC Joint Technical Committee 1 for Information Technology[8]. The standard consists thus far of four parts:
ISO/IEC 21838-1:2021 Information technology - Top-level ontologies (TLO) - Part 1: Requirements, which describes characteristics required of domain-neutral top-level
ontologies for use with lower-level domain ontologies to support
data exchange,
retrieval,
discovery,
integration and analysis.
ISO/IEC 21838-2:2021 Information technology - Top-level ontologies (TLO) - Part 2: Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) describes
Basic Formal Ontology (BFO), as an
ontology conformant to the requirements specified in ISO/IEC 21838-1.
ISO/IEC 21838-3:2023 Information Technology - Top-level ontologies (TLO) - Part 3: Descriptive ontology for linguistic and cognitive engineering (DOLCE) describes
Descriptive Ontology for Linguistic and Cognitive Engineering (DOLCE), as an
ontology conformant to the requirements specified in ISO/IEC 21838-1.
ISO/IEC 21838-4:2023 Information Technology - Top-level ontologies (TLO) - Part 4: TUpper describes TUpper, as an
ontology conformant to the requirements specified in ISO/IEC 21838-1.
Top-Level Ontology Requirements
ISO/IEC 21838-1[1] prescribes the following requirements for any top-level ontology.
A TLO shall include a textual artifact represented by a
natural language document providing:
A list of domain-neutral terms and relational expressions
Definitions of all non-primitive terms and relational expressions that are non-circular, form a
consistent set, and are concise, i.e. contain no redundant elements.
The
signature of the TLO shall contain no terms or relational expressions that are used exclusively in one or in a restricted group of domains.
The TLO shall further be made available via a Common Logic (CL) axiomatization conforming to
ISO/IEC 24707.
The ontology documentation specified above shall be made publicly available and consist of:
A natural language document designed to support use and maintenance of the ontology by human users
An axiomatization of the ontology in OWL 2 with direct semantics designed to support computational reasoning
Where relevant, a CL axiomatization of the ontology in an
ISO/IEC 24707 conformant language
Supplementary documentation shall be made publicly available:
Specifying how the ontology is used or is intended to be used
Specifying how the OWL axiomatization is
logically derivable from the CL axiomatization
Demonstrating the breadth of coverage of the ontology
Documenting policies for ontology management
Demonstrating Breadth of Coverage
To demonstrate a sufficiently broad coverage domain and thus to show that it is a true top-level ontology, each candidate TLO is required to show that it has a very wide range of application, ideally one that covers all entities in the
universe. Given that the main purpose of the TLO is to enhance the
data in a range of
databases in such a way as to promote their integration and discoverability, it suffices to demonstrate that coverage domain of the candidate TLO extends across a very broad and diverse range of types of data which the terms in the ontology may then be used to
annotate. The strategy for demonstrating breadth of coverage accordingly rests on the provision in ISO/IEC 21838-1 of a list of types of data, including data about:
Space and time; space and place; time and change
Parts, wholes, unity and boundaries
Scale and granularity
Qualities and other attributes (such as dispositions[12] and roles[13])
Artifacts and socially constructed entities (such as money)
Mental entities
Each candidate TLO is required to specify how it will deal with data under all, or nearly all, of these headings, or to specify ontologies built using this TLO which already serve this purpose.
Basic Formal Ontology, for example (see below), has no native term for information entities such as sentences or data items or publications. These terms are however supplied by the BFO-conformant Information Artifact Ontology (IAO).[16]
Basic Formal Ontology as a Top-Level Ontology
ISO/IEC 21838-2[2] describes how
Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) satisfies the requirements of ISO/IEC 21838-1. BFO is an ontology developed by
Barry Smith and his collaborators. A BFO textbook was published in 2015[17][18] to promote interoperability among the very large number of domain ontologies[19][20] built using its terms and relational expressions.[21]
The BFO ontology is documented in the ISO Standards Maintenance Portal here.[22] This includes:
A natural language document providing domain-neutral terms and relational expressions accompanied by concise, consistent, and non-circular definitions[23] for all non-primitive terms[24]
A signature containing no terms or relational expressions used exclusively in one or in a restricted group of domains.
An axiomatization in OWL 2 with the direct semantics.[25]
In addition, the community of BFO developers and users has provided:
A publicly available ontology developers' guide,[28]
Publicly available repositories for the OWL 2 and CL axiomatizations incorporating commentary on these axiomatizations and identifying candidate areas for revision.[29][30][31][32]
Munn, Katherine; Smith, Barry (2013). Applied Ontology: An Introduction. Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag.
ISBN9783110324860.
Neuhaus, Fabian; Grenon, Pierre; Smith, Barry (2004). "A Formal Theory of Substances, Qualities, and Universals". Formal Ontology in Information Systems. Amsterdam: IOS Press. pp. 49–59.
ISBN1586034685.
Smith, Barry (2012). "On Classifying Material Entities in Basic Formal Ontology". Interdisciplinary Ontology. Proceedings of the Third Interdisciplinary Ontology Meeting. 3. Tokyo: Keio University Press: 1–13.