 الى اليوم نحكي عن الانتولوجي انجنيري المرة الماضية حكينا عن على فكرة عن الانتولوجي انجنيري حكينا كان التركيز بمشاك في الانتولوجي انجنيري الصايد اللي حكينا عنه كان بركز على شو رحبت في داخل الانتولوجي و هل اللي هي هذه السيب الأخير يعني تصير سكيمة ولا تصير ولا هي الانتولوجي what makes a good ontology حكينا انه فيه فيه اعتبرات بين الانتولوجي والانتولوجي بروبرتيز يعني this is going to make our ontology good or bad our choices our modeling choices right now in this lecture we will go a little deeper it's also about about ontology engineering it's all about improving your skill to be a good ontology engineer and believe me there is no methodology to help you 100% to build a good ontology so in this lecture I will even show a methodology but still this is makes a little improvement the reading material of this lecture will be I don't know why I decided to speak English today but if there is a problem I don't mind if you understand more in Arabic I will speak not only what is written and these slides but there will be many things that I will say and we will discuss together that are not actually written so you have to watch the video to make sure that you understand everything first second there are two things that you have to read two chapters from my B.H.D.T.C.s chapter 2 and chapter 3 and by the way if you read them you will even understand the difference between an ORM and an ontology the other paper this is a short article about glosses how to write a gloss so this is the reading material now we will show two parts of this lecture will be the ontology engineering challenges what challenges will you face when you build an ontology as an ontology engineer you are called an ontology engineer and then I will show you a methodology that I developed called double articulation ontology double articulation this is the name of the methodology it will help you a little to engineer to design your ontology so we start with the challenges the first two big challenges that I identified are ontology usability and ontology reusability if you understand the difference between usability and reusability you will see exactly where is the problem there is another problem called ontology application dependence so even I will not give you a solution but discussing these challenges we will help you to make your choices usability and reusability so what do you think the difference is something reusable what is the difference between you say I reuse this or I use this so you have application so ok let's see you have windows you installed it in your computer so you used the windows right and you installed it again you installed windows again you also call it reuse so it's not reuse so what do you think what do you think so you are using the example I used from last year now try to use another example what is the difference between something usable and something reusable so let's make an example for example you developed a method for example to say a stem or let's make another example for example you want to develop a program to detect just detect somebody give you a text and you know which language is this so we say well it developed this algorithm well it the program well it built it is actually usable but not reusable why I developed a reusable program but not usable or I don't know so what is the difference other applications can use so this you call this usable reuse for one application let's make another example we have four different ontologies legal person ontologies so we built four different ontologies but all are about legal person how to judge that this ontology is usable and this ontology they say more usable than another ontology or another ontology is more reusable than another one you want to say something okay let's take this this is the ontology you don't have to look used by application one 9000 times a day we have an ontology used by an application 9000 times a day is this usable or reusable so we say for example if you ask me what is this application one for example there is a web service to exchange companies profile this ontology so web service what is this application is actually is a look up table ministry for example of economy provides a web service that you can query companies profiles so there are 9000 applications using this ontology birthday another application that for a chamber of commerce it's also a web service to exchange companies profiles based on this ontology okay so this is another ontology look this is one ontology this is another ontology now this ontology is used by same ontology by the two applications the first one is about the first application is a web service at the ministry of economy to query profiles of companies the second application is kind of similar but not exactly application provided or developed by the chamber of commerce to exchange companies profiles okay so we have two different applications using ontology 2 so ontology 1 used by one application 9000 times a day application 2 an ontology 2 used by application one again with 10,000 times a day another 10 10 another sorry 1,000 1,000 times a day is this is usable usable and reusable now is this ontology usable seems yes is it reusable we don't know because there are there is no other applications that actually use it so we don't know if it's reusable or not the second one reusable again we have a third ontology used by third application that for banks so banks design their new account for based on the companies properties in this ontology for example means so you understand this is an old service right this is an old service also but by another organization this is not our service this application means that banks take the ontology and use this ontology just to design when they have created a new account there's a form right so they need to know about the properties of companies so they use this ontology it's an off time offline use or off time use so it's not online use you understand they get the ontology and they say and they actually use it but this is not application but it's use right so this is used by 10 times a day 100 times a day 100 times a day is this an ontology reusable more than this even this is thousand even this is 9000 9000 reusable we get fourth ontology for the people who came there we are discussing what the difference between usability and reusable how to know that an ontology is more usable than another one or more reusable than another one now application 4 well this is also ontology so this is web service by ministry of economy this application is web service by ministry of chamber of commerce sorry by the chamber of commerce this is offline use by banks but this is a fourth one that lawyers when they go to the court they use this software it's also offline use they say oh according to the legal version of ontology the blah blah blah so they use it this is usually 4 ontologies about the same domain but actually let's suppose this is developed by Mustafa this is developed by Dima this is developed by Mona this is developed by Maram and you are fifth application which one you choose the fourth one look the fourth one is actually cannot be used more than 10 times a day this one is 9000 times a day so it depends on which one which ontology you think should be more expensive if you want to buy one of these ontologies which one you value more the fourth one so Maram okay go ahead the fourth one we can apply it in different applications it's more parameterized it's more it's more open it's more open it can fit since it can be used by more than 4 applications so it's open so that means lot of other issues are taken into account so the guy who built this it was Maram Maram when she built this ontology she took into account that application x application y more applications when she built it she took this into account but well this application application 1 it actually has more requirements so if you put the requirements of this application it contradicts with the another for example the third one right so you want to go more general or more specific more general if you are more general this is specific if you are less specific then when you come to use it you have to add a lot of things right so the question is there is we say let's use another example you have software for bank for any bank do you buy this information system that is very general for any bank or you buy information system designed only for Islamic bank which one do you choose the one that can handle any bank yes but well there is no magic here if it can handle any bank because the requirements of the Islamic bank is completely different or different from the from the Arab bank do you have the same products and services do you have the same services at the Arab bank no so we cannot use something extremely specific and extremely general at the same time it has to be either specific so if you want to add something to specify it it cost you more do you see the point so maximize it this is just an example this is just an example I put so within what is usability maximizing the different maximizing the number of different applications the same kind of task it's okay if it's actually different applications but they use it exactly for the same task this is usability reusability maximizing the number of different applications using the ontology over different types of tasks the more different types of tasks you take into account the more reusable your ontology will be yes more specific requirements you will take into account for a certain task the more usable your ontology will be you see the difference between usability and reusability any question so I will answer it why reusability why do we have to care about reusability why we like reusability maybe this is not correct should be that we consider reusability why reusability why do we have to care about reusability yes we need to build an ontology for every application that we face in life if we have general applications so we save time cost and effort we save time and effort this is why we want to go for reusability this is by default anything is like this save time cost and effort if your application needs to be modified if you want to modify your application since the ontology is so general so easily you can modify your application or you can use things that are not available in your application you don't see that what is this what has it been or increased the reliability if we increase reusability we actually increase reliability why the ontology becomes more reliable it is more reusable because it has been tested by different things something else it's a quality factor it's an important quality factor if your ontology is reusable it's better it's better well it's more it's one quality why how a higher usable ontology is an indication of that it's a good ontology right how to increase usability how we do increase usability by being closer to the application specifications and requirements right just be close to the application requirements how to increase reusability so by taking into account different usage application to become more general is correct now well can ontology be reusable and reusable at the same time this slide I don't answer you do you increase the reusability increase the usability trade-off between reusability and reuse yes well so when you build an ontology what you should do what you should do when you build an ontology balance balance between reusability and reuse well you have to be very very very smart to make the balance and this is another problem so it's not only balance between and expressing this is another problem you have to also compromise reusability and reuseability right the more an ontology is reusable the less it will be a good ontology engineer knows how and where to compromise this trade-off you see actually first I want to say two things a good ontology engineer costs a lot of money I don't know I don't know who among you is the best ontology engineer but it's really it costs a lot of money because a lot of effort exactly a lot of effort because if you want to build a reusable ontology you have to think more about different applications you have to open your mind now another thing I want to say believe me this is not only about ontologies usability and reusability and software engineering so what I'm teaching you is not only this scale or this issue is not only for ontology engineering for software engineering and if you take more more things you become less use of it so should you consider a specific issue or be more general well just be smart where and how to compromise well this is very smart point when I say you have to take into account also modifications on your ontology or software well I would say there it becomes another another task another application it actually application you remember here application one and application two is a little thing when developed by ministry of economy and one chamber of commerce which means it's kind of overlap maybe you can see it as a change to the software it becomes like another application so a good software engineer knows where and how to compromise okay now for the ontologies I want to show you another problem and then we go to a methodology try to minimize the problem but not maybe solve no for example we have assumption here ontologies are supposed to capture knowledge at the domain limit every one says ontologies are supposed to be independent of the applications this is what we learned this is what all ontologies ontology scientists are brainwashing us now let's understand the problem the problem is when building an ontology there will be always there will always be intended or expected usability requirements at hand and these requirements will influence the independence level of the ontology okay let's suppose we want to build ontology for e-government well we see this for e-government it's an application it's an application so how can we build an ontology without thinking of an application we can well even we try to think with more applications well we will think about 2, 3, 4 more applications okay we want to build it for e-government applications we know the applications and we want to be a good ontology engineer so we try to use the same ontology for maybe 3, 4 more applications right but still that means we have intended or expected applications at hand so our application will be influenced by these applications see the problem this is called an interaction problem it's a well known problem not only for ontologies but another thing what you called what you called problem I feel it's not a problem call it an issue it's an actual problem a problem for this so the problem says representing knowledge for the bearers of solving some problem is strongly affected by the nature of the problem and the influence strategy to be applied to the problem let's take this example this one so I will show you now 2 ontologies and you will see the problem see where is the point this ontology is about you don't need to look to the ontology look to the applications Amazon one book street WBN.com these are book stores they share an ontology about books this ontology let's read it a book is a subtype of product a book has an ISBN a book has a title a book has an author a book is a subtype of product a product has a price a price amounted to value an image of it in a currency this is the ontology well let's read what is this you don't need this which means an ISBN is an identity of a book right this is the ontology that online book stores are using now what is the meaning of a book here so is this a book no of course it does not have an ISBN or it's not a title and author or whatever okay let me ask according to this ontology your master thesis is this a book according to this ontology this is you know what is this this is a thesis or a report a graduation report of value his bachelor degree is this a book according to this ontology no why it has a title it has a title it has an author and by the way a title and author are optional there is no ISBN so if there is no ISBN it's a product but it's an optional that it has a price leaking here was the most important issue that we miss to say this is not a book so if there is an ISBN here we call this is a book no so this is not a book so amazon will not accept this it's true by the way do you think this is a book in life why not so i mean if he put ISBN you consider this is a book no it is published published by the university okay if we go now to the library of the university is this a book according to this ontology this is the libraries of universities book has an ISBN book has title book has author is this a book according to this ontology yes yes it is a book which means which means that if Walid want to book him his his thesis to one of these libraries they will accept it amazon will not accept but in practice in life why this is not a book it is published by the university so this is published so okay if you bring it there you will accept i mean this is the problem i don't know how to write i don't know how to write no no so if i give you now how this book bring it in this way do you consider it a book but why this is not a book actually this is even better than this the value what's written inside look it has all types chapters like how this book so why this is not a book now now look now this what is a book in this ontology and in this ontology what we are doing the most important difference is if we call the head of amazon and we ask him well i give an open little prize for my thesis and it is published by the university why don't you consider my thesis not a book what he will say do you understand my question if you call the president of amazon and you are angry you said listen i get an open enterprise for my book and you don't consider it a book however you consider it still with things a book and you sell them in your bookstore so what he will say what he will say what he will say he will say oh sorry this is actually a book but we don't sell it for you please first put ice being on it and then i will sell it then is it really something if i put ice being on my mobile then it considered a book for amazonias so what is this requirement is actually an amazon's requirement it's not about the meaning of a book it's application requirement it's a specific application requirement you see so if you put constraints if you put more constraints you make the applications heavy which means you consider the application requirements yes they will like it it makes them happy they like it because something this is without ice being it cannot be sold something can be sold is considered a book but this is not about what is the meaning of a book it's about selling so it's an application requirement maybe some bookstores will sell books without ice being who cares you see now this is the difference between on tour g1 and on tour g2 is actually application requirements so this is about the mandatory let's try about we don't want to discuss the other differences this and this but but you can see this is also kind of application requirement Amazon they don't care if the name of the author is one block or two blocks but for libraries they say now we first them and last them this is another requirement another requirement for libraries basically these are not ontologies to be honest these are look usability perspective because these are usability perspective not usability perspective these are usability issues to make them happy to make them more usable usability perspective lead to different and sometimes contradicting or conflicting axiomatizations although these axiomatizations might agree at the domain level for example you remember the president of Amazon said oh no it is a book but I just don't want to sell it so they agree at the domain level that this is a book so you see the point who can show me a third ontology will completely contradict with this with one of these who can give me a third ontology or applications that they will completely conflict with this big conflict that because you know everything accepted here is accepted here you see this is more general than this this one is more general than this right? a third ontology that will contradict completely with one of them with one of you if you put mandatory here or here here if you put mandatory here no if you put mandatory here everything here will be accepted here it is not mandatory there but mandatory there it has no title actually you are right basically but I want to give you something even else about even ICBM suppose you have a library inside a museum museums also they show books right so they have an ontology of books museums now you know what is the most important thing for them it should not it should not no it should not an ICBM because if it has an ICBM then it's a new book we don't need it it's completely contradicting each other okay? you understand it? so both are not ontologies they are just data skins and because actually they think they are extrinsic about this basically this is one of the big things now can you build a useful and application in independent ontology the answer is? no of course not because the word useful and independent they are completely contradicting each other well again compromise compromise so the third the second part of the lecture today is about ontology double articulation ontology double articulation is very interesting methodology because actually chapter I tell you my thesis okay I say okay let's look inside the ontology and try to see where are the things that we can generalize and the specific things that actually we move out in other words I divide the ontology into several things one of them to care about reusability and the other one is to care about usability this is the point so I say oh this is not one ontology I make separation two things so if you remember these are the applications it's not the ontology sorry everything is the ontology but I make separation so this one is application independent and the other one it can be application independent that was based the intuition of the we will come to this slide again like this well they say these are these modules we keep them because these guys have it we keep it because you know if we go more general this will not be having these applications so to make them happy all applications we keep it but we take out certain things from here we put it here and you know what see this red what is this red things are the constraints move the constraints out and put the other things in front the other things will be reusable and the red ones which are the constraints there was to care about usability so in other words the ontology becomes is not one point one block it's actually different blocks there is a block called domain axiomatization domain ontology and application or application kind we should call it application kind this is highly reusable why because it's at the domain of it and this is highly reusable because this cares about the application okay so in other words why I call it this lecture ontology engineering because actually I didn't tell you what to do I just it's an engineering solution it's not like build your ontology in this way and that way no this is but this part here so this part becomes reusable this part becomes now to see actually you didn't study what this word meant but we are going to study next lecture we will talk about this is a language ontology very general it's like an arabic ontology it's a very general ontology for everything at the language so this is where it can be a domain axiomatization so we can put where it or the arabic ontology in this level and then we build later we go more specific now this link is very important what is this link where I call it ontological commitment why because still this is application basically this is application knowledge right even for one application I put one this ontologically commit to what is inside this ontology so the probabilities of this part are it accounts for the intended meaning of the vocabulary at the domain level what does it mean accounts it takes into account the meaning and the domain and it root a human language or a community ontologicalization which means we take into account the language community the language or a community our community well I don't mean language so we go very general and this is something I don't know if you can understand it or not it's called interpreted intentionally not extensionally when you know AI next year next semester you will understand it better and so this becomes for this for this bar we take this black things from here okay we take all black things these are actually this bar we take it and we put more constraints so the other one becomes a vocabulary space we call it now let's study theory of let's study theory of this the philosophy of this what is the concept what is the concept a set of rules in our mind about a certain thing in reality or to distinguish similar things in reality right we say book it's for book there are set of rules in our mind to distinguish what is a book from other things in reality person there are set of rules in our mind to distinguish between person and other things in reality now if we take these rules and we say okay we are going to scan the whole wall and collect the set of instances of books or persons and we put them inside this green area we just collect all books in the world even the past and in the future and we put them inside this area so these are the set of instances of possible instances for we are going to say book which means we call it i i this is called this one i so i is the set of the intended models of the concept c for example book we take what is book at the human language conceptualization level what is book in general and we call it we put all books here okay now let's take the application site okay so this book here is actually at the domain maximization now we talk now about the application maximization now application we see application A that it is interested according to each user in a subset of these so this becomes more specific so this is the set of legal models we call it of application B this is application B for example no this example is for university libraries the ontology of the libraries university libraries is actually a subset because also they don't put everything they are more general than amazon but they don't put everything so it's a subset so if we call it all according to the ontology we discussed earlier we call it all everything can be called a book and we put it inside it becomes in this area right now if we go to amazon ontology that we developed earlier we put it it becomes actually here right it's not the ontology becomes here the meaning of a book the instances of what is a book this is called the model the so this is I application 2 this is application 3 application 3 it's here you get the thumb up do you agree so what is a book in the language the whole green one what is a book for library is called IB what is a book for amazon it's IC so it's not all books are accident now what is a book for a museum it's here you see there is no intersection so they conflict each other what is a book for one is not a book for the other one but basically at the language level both are books so what is the double articulation theory then is this one what is the theory the set of models for application i is a subset of i double articulation theory why it's called double articulation I will go back what does it mean articulation why it's called double articulation let's discuss what does it mean articulation in English who is the best in English here what is articulation what is articulation what is articulation what is articulation what is it what is the definition of articulation I don't know articulation is building or something it's something it's sort of like calling something or saying something expressing something good word so it's about أتصدق تفصيل. ومال أرتيبول يكسبريس. كولتعبير. أو أبير. هنا يتصدق سبريس. سبريس. سبريسه. سبريسه. سبريسه. ونبدأ كي تطبيق المزيد. ونفق المزيد. ونفق المزيد. ونفق المزيد. ترى؟ لذا سأعود إلى أخر مكان. سبريسه. لن نكون أكثر عمليا ما يعني أننا نساعد هذا لذا أريد أن نقضي مطلقا، كيف يمكنني أن أستخدم بمتواجهة الوثيركية؟ هذا هو now the question we want to answer نفهم سيارة أنسية حسناً، نفهم سيارة لنوضع بمتواجهة الوثيركية لكن كيف يمكنني أن أستخدم بمتواجهة الوثيركية؟ لذلك ل to apply the theory and practice أنت يمكنك أن تأكد أن تلك المتواجهة انت تكافك في هذا الشرض انجنيرتج Block لذا صنِ you need to route your vocabulary يعني أن all vocabulary used in the application exhumatization is linked with the vocabulary of the men's axumatization which can be a linguistic resource for example For example here each concert in an ORM model لأن أوليس like OREM is linked with a concept in what need or the Arabic ontology. So you will say city, you say let's not, let's say. And the fourth ontology, fourth ontology. There is a person, there is a person. Now what you really should do in order to be usable and reusable the same time. You should link. The concept person in fourth with what need or the dictionary. Because if I build then if I build an ontology and I define what is there so because I don't like fourth and we both link our concept in what need which is just a dictionary. Means that actually we agree at the domain link. If a certain vocabulary does not exist in a domain maximization then you must define, then it must be defined or introduced with a gloss. Then it must be defined and introduced with a gloss. Means if you have a word that does not exist in where did, just define. In the same way we have made this better. Context. Each application, axiomatization must have a context to define its scope of interpretation. Made it modularized. Application, axiomatization into several modules. We talked about modularization, right? Yes, in OREM. Same thing. Now this is another how you see now what I will do and then we finish the lecture. These four steps or four issues I will just show you how in details. How can I link or route my vocabulary? Okay, this is not OREM but suppose it is. But this is an OREM. Here I define the word municipality. Okay? I define municipality. So what I should do in OREM? I just use httwww.brinstone.edu slash blah blah blah. And I make municipality as a sub-class of, I define municipality as a sub-class of this concept. Which is here in the domain axiomatization. What is the definition of municipality? Do you see what I mean? Another word. When you build your ontology even in OREM. Try to use to say okay this is actually sub-class of something in OREM. You remember you are defining everything sub-class of thing, right? Well just don't put a class of thing. You can do it but always use the definitions. Use where need in your ontology. In your ontology. In your ontology. What is your ontology? Your ontology is here. And this ontology is for everyone in the world. In other words we link all ontologies we built into one resource. This becomes really reusable. This becomes really reusable. It's okay to be marriage specific for certain application here. It's okay. But go to the domain link. So each vocabulary in your ontology can be linked through and the name is based. You know the name is based. With a concept and linguistic resource. For example a sense of the word. We explain this ontology. We talked about it or no? We talked about it? So this is I just remind you this is the ORM. I will show you now this ontology built according to the double articulation theory. So this is an example of an ontology. That it is built according to double articulation. So you remember the application. Okay I don't want to remind you with the application. So we have a customer comprehend portal that uses certain ontology. Now we will see how this ontology is built according to the double articulation theory. This is a module in the ontology. It's about compliant. Complaint describes a problem. Complaint actually issued by a complainant against a complaint recipient. To request a complaint resolution and so on. You can record it from the other lectures. This is another module of the ontology. This is another module of the same ontology. This is another third module or this is the seventh module. Okay. You can download the ontology from here. Now look this is one picture to show you. This is one picture to show you how this ontology was engineered. According to an articulation theory. So the applications are here. Okay. Where is the ontology that is written in ORM? It's here. We have seven modules. Seven bars. Each of them ontologically commit to this bar. Don't be afraid from this bar. This bar is just stored in a database. Even access database. It's very simple. We have compliant. Non-natural version is a subtype of complainant. Natural version is a subtype of complainant. Complaint has compliant date. Complaint has compliant number. So it's term. Relation term. But here I say role and inverse role. Just to store. You remember the black things in the diagram? Now. Wow. Nobody asked me what is this. We will come. So this is called the ontology base. This is called the ontology base. And this is called commitments. Because they ontologically commit to the ontology base. But basically this is the domain axiomatization. And this is the application axiomatization. One domain axiomatization. And different or many or several. Application axiomatization. I call it axiomatization, not ontology. But look, I call it ontology. Now. And this link is called ontological commitment. But there are two things I didn't talk about. One is this one and this one. This is called context. And this is called gloss. Each term here or here actually. Here or here. Should. Has a gloss. Should have a gloss. And. Sit of. This is called lixon. Lixon is actually like the fact type. Fact type. And other. At that time we didn't know. This is little old. We called it lixon. Okay. Let's go. Let's take this example. We have to define complete. So always you have to have gloss. For each term. What is a gloss? Definition. Definition. Let's see what is a gloss. We call it an informal. Sorry. An auxiliary informal. But control account. Of the intended meaning. Account means description. Description of the intended meaning of a linguistic term. For the common sense. Preception of humans. So. If you have this ontology. For example. Even in our. It must have a gloss. A book. A written material that yields knowledge. Or understanding. As pages bound together. Blah blah blah blah. Well. A gloss is not a blah blah blah. A gloss is completely. I mean. For sure I will give you questions in the second. And the final example about gloss. This is absolutely. Grand. So please. It's not a blah blah. It's not supposed to. Sorry. It's supposed to render factual knowledge. That it is critical to understand. A concept. But. That is imbluzable. Imbluzable. Or unreasonable. Or. Very difficult to formalize. Or articulating. Now. It is not. It is not. To catalog general information or comments. Conventional dictionaries. And encyclopedia's do. And here. How to make. To say. Ah. Another way to compromise. Because. I don't really like to see. Okay. Don't worry. Let's start writing a gloss. How. The gloss should look like. Or don't you. First. So I have the way. For example search engine. Let's define with the search engine. What is the most important. Where we should start with. What is the search engine. A computer program that. We say. We take the super type. And we start. From the super type. We start from the super type. We take the super type. And we start. So a search engine. A computer program that. What is the name of the voice. A business department. That. What is the university. An institution of. So you take the super type. Exactly. Exactly. You start with the super type. And then you write. What. You start with. Interesic properties. Which means. Distinguishing characteristics. And interesic properties. That differentiate the concept. Out of other concepts. So we say. Which is. Better. A laptop. A laptop. So we write. A computer. That is designed. To do pretty much. Anything as a desktop. Computer can do. It runs. For a shared term. Usually. 2 to 5 hours. This is one definition. Do you like it. A portable computer. Small enough. To use in your lab. Why. Short. Short and meaningful. We started with the. Super type. Both start with the super type. Super type. Now. I mean. Why. Super type. Because. Because. The second one. Not short. No. Exactly. Gave you only. The first one. A battery. So. If I don't have a battery. It is a laptop. Basically. This is the bad thing. Now. The third. Characteristic. About how to write a clause. It should be written in. Form. Of propositions. What does it mean. So. It should be written. The way you should write it. It's not like a story. It's a proposition. To help. Actually. Construct the image of the concept. For example. Let's compare. A computer program. For searching the internet. It can be defined. As one of the most useful. Aspects. Of the worldwide web. Some of these. Are. This is. Exactly. A computer program. That enables user to search. And retrieve documents. Or data. From a database. Or from a computer as well. So are you sure you can define. So. We start with a super type. We start with a super type. And then. We focus on the. Distinguishing characteristics. And we write them in. There are three other things. There are three other things. You are allowed to use examples. Your examples. Try to. Only use them when there are. No. To clarify. Cases. Where are the commonly known to be true. But they are false. Or they are commonly known to be false. But they are true. For example. Can we say an e-book is a book. Bdf wire. Of course yes. Because this typically does not come to any. To the mind of anyone. So we say for example e-book. Or things that are commonly known to be true. But they are false. Try to use these things. If needed. And now. Remember that we are not building a dictionary here. We are building an ontology. If you start with a supertype. For example. You have to be consistent with the formal definitions of the ontology. Do not make contradictions. Here you say. A book should not have an SVM. But at the same time you put the SVM in your ontology. Do not make contradictions. And of course. You have to be sufficient. Clear and easy to understand. Okay. Do you know how to write a gloss? A good gloss. No. You do not have a choice here. Because your job is to write glosses. I know. Okay. Context. When you build an ontology. You must write the context of the ontology. You must write the context of the ontology. What does it mean the context of the ontology? It is actually the scope. When you write a program. Do you define the scope in the beginning? When you have what we taught you. In software engineering. You have to write the scope of the program. And this is the same. You have to write the scope of the ontology. So what does it mean the scope? Here. Or the context. The word here. For example. This is just an identifier. That refers to implicit. Or maybe these assumptions. In which the interpretation of the term is bounded to. Let me give you this example. To show you the context of this ontology of customer complex. We say. We start like this. You have to follow this way. It is very easy. It really helps you to write the context quickly. And you have to know the context. Whether it is explicit. Or implicit. About all activities. Communication. Institution. Places. Objects. That are involved in the customer-provider relationship. Regarding the contractual and non-contractual complex issues. These assumptions. Because here. Customer-compliance. And. Not only customer-compliance. Basically. That project. We define what is customer-compliance. In e-commerce. And means there is transactions between people. So we say. What is the context? Is actually there is background knowledge. About. Activities, communications, people, institutions. Whatever. In the customer-provider relationship. These assumptions can be understood. Not can be found. Can be understood. Can be. Explicitly. Or intuitively. In different resources. These resources. European Distance Sealing Directive. Blah blah blah. European e-commerce Directive. European Data Protection. Blah blah. Sorry. Not concept. No. Exactly. Look here to this. Here. This is the ontology. Problem. What does it mean problem? What is the problem? Problem. مشكلة. No. And. More specific. We have this law. This law. This directive. This regulation. This. This. This. If you want to understand. Or say. No. Don't tell me that. I made a mistake when I defined the problem. Because I am. I only care about. This domain. So tell me now. Document. If we define. If we define. You know. This is not ontology. Government ontology. We built in Palestine. What is the context of this ontology? So what can be. The context. For the. Government ontology. All Palestinians laws. All Palestinians laws. Regulations inside the ministries. They really draw. The service guides. In all ministries. The databases in the ministries. The BML in the ministries. And so on. So this is actually the definition of the domain. Of the scope. We call this the scope. Of interpretation. Because this is the pool of applications. Okay. Now. I think last one. Model arise. You know. I will repeat exactly what I said. I thought you. So. The same example. Same slides. And it's very simple. So. As a set of modules. And later compose them to form one module. You remember this example. Yeah. You remember this. Don't build it. To do. So 2 together. Form one. What can be used by. For other applications. 3. Are ligne or wanted to the application. To the domain. Excuse Do. Is here too. انتظره انتظره ونقلت ونقلت أنت بخير لأنهم صغير انتظره ونقل لك لتقديم المدينة لأنك تعلم أني لديك أكثر صحيح ويجب أن أساعد أساعدني كيف أستطيع أن أقول حسنا أنت تقلت بخير ونقلت بخير ونقلت بخير وهم أيضا أن يتلتق بخير ويجب أن أهدفك لذا أن أريد أن أ습ضك لما لا أساعدني أن أ Nabla ونوضع أمي يستطيع أن أغرط وندخل يمكن أن يكون سبجي 중에ينا أو سبجي أو سبجي أو يمكن أن يكون به منظمة الأحيان أنه يستيب و منظمة انت بخير؟ انت بخير. هل هناك سؤال؟ هل هناك سؤال؟ هل هناك سؤال؟ شكرا