Terminology Management for Semantic Interoperability and Unified Awareness (Web 4.0) among persons, cultures, communities, groups, organizations, services, and systems.

[Roy Roebuck]

A shared terminology is needed before effective and efficient communication can take place.

In the recent Recovery.gov dialog on IT, several ideas and comments were submitted on the topics of "Terminology before Technology" and "Semantics-then-Syntax-then-Technology". See Terminology Ideas. A previous posting on the terminology idea was made here at NewIdeasForGovernment. A public domain approach to developing this Web 4.0 Unified Awareness capability is available.

This discussion is for Terminology practitioner, technologist, and beneficiary roles involved in all parts of a Terminology Managment effort. Note: This discussion is not about technology, but about communication first between people, and then between people and computers (as in the Semantic Web), although terminology will be most useful when it operates with integrated semantic, data, and network technologies.

Some terminology roles are:
~authors,
~editors,
~analysts,
~librarians,
~historians,
~lexicon builders,
~glossary builders,
~dictionary builders,
~unstructured content management system (e.g., office document repositories) administrators,
~semistructued content management system (e.g., email, directory, web page, XML document repository) administrators,
~structured content managemnet system (e.g., SQL, XML, RDF, OWL data store) administrators,
~search engine, subject-tree, and saved search administrators,
~concept modelers e.g., modeling using basic directed-labeled graph - DLG with underlying triples data, and its variant:
~ ~concept maps,
~ ~concept of operation - CONOPS diagrams,
~ ~conceptual data models,
~ ~logical data models such as Entity Relationship Diagrams - ERD, IDEF1X, and UML Class Diagrams,
~ ~object role models - ORM,
~ ~process models such as BPMN, IDEF3, several UML diagrams,
~ontologists including Enterprise Architecture metamodelers for EA tool vendors and clients,
~Knowlege-base builders (using corresponding ontology) such as EA modelers for organizations
~Artificial Intelligence and Expert System builders
~axiologists building value-stream, value-chain, and what I've termed value-lattice (i.e., micro to macro inferred-value-chains) models such as economists, ecologists, strategists, meteorogist,
~value-base builders (using corresponding axiology) for appropriately secure and shared semantically-interoperable situational awareness (i.e., content and context of a given situation or subject),
~taxonomy builders (for enriched subject-tree references to populated master-metadata and master-data lookup tables),
~thesaurus builders (for enriched subject, jargon, and natural-languate translators between the preferred and alternate meanings in a domain and the terms that convey those meanings, including acronyms, aliases, abbreviations, and alternate spellings,
~metamodelers using semantic interoperability definitions and capability as lookup reference values,
~metadata and schema modelers using semantic interoperability definitions and capability as lookup reference values,
~data entry and maintenance personnel.

[Roy Roebuck]

No technology solution should be implemented until the SQL data schema, XML/RDF metamodel, or RDF/OWL ontology for the solution is highly developed, tested, and approved.

[Roy Roebuck]

No data schema, metamodel, or ontology should be developed beyond a preliminary stage until the underlying semantic/meaning of the metadata and data is clearly accepted for the development context.