Response Paper Four

The Challenge of Ontological Represention

The quest to represent an array of diverse knowledge communities within the realm of IT will never be complete. The fact alone that cultures and knowledge are not static is a basis for such a claim. Therefore, their ontological representation in any medium can never be fully realized. Also, any attempt at meta-analysis of a specific subject within a knowledge community, albeit to more accurately represent its ontology, might stimulate cultural transformation, thereby creating a recursive framework for all involved in the process of representation. When a community is engaged in such a representation it is essential that they understand (as well as those who might be assisting them with information systems technical support) culture is dynamic and that reflection upon their "digital" ontology can stimulate cultural change. Once this is understood, the community must then be willing to continually "update" their ontological representation throughout time. This will ensure an accurate cultural representation as interconnectivity and interoperability of multiple ontological representations are achieved.

The suggestion that culture is dynamic (not static) can be supported by historical and anthropological data beyond the scope of this paper. Within the discussion of ontological representation in information systems, specifically on the internet, "individuals within a given community attach different descriptions to shared phenomena, and they need to continue to describe the world differently" (Srinivasan, p. 13). Individual descriptions of shared phenomena create "contrasting and fluid ontologies" (Srinivasan, p.13) which act as competing memes (units of cultural information) to construct an encompassing community domain ontology. Any representation at a given time of a community's ontology, therefore, is a result of a synergy between individual descriptions of shared phenomena. These descriptions will change as shared phenomena change over time. The work of accurate ontological representation through IT is therefore neverending.

A community engaged in their ontological representation will be experiencing a new shared phenomenon that is self-reflective. Over time, the ability to view an ontology objectively (or even slightly objectively) can expose knowledge (the lack of) that was previously undetectable. Such a realization might be an impetus for those engaged to provide descriptions that would not have been brought forth without the ontological representation. These descriptions might then enter the realm of a type of critical cultural literacy, or meta-analysis of a subset of knowledge. As has been experienced through post-modern theory of culture in the West, critical cultural-literacy has proved to transform overall ontology and representation of ontologies (for example: Standardization, Objectivity, and User Focus: A Meta-Analysis of Subject Access Critiques by Olsen & Schlegl, 2001). If Indigenous groups around the world who are engaged in ontological representation experience a similar cultural literacy, it is unknown how they will change. Perhaps they will be able to strengthen their community and cultural identity through a multiplicity of descriptions. On the other hand, various fluid ontologies within a community may "fork" away from each other to create unique ontological representations. How this will play out is of concern in the same way previous introduction of foreign technology by ethnographers/anthropologists been shown to disrupt indigenous communities. Ontological representation through IT is a far cry from an introduction of simple tool; it is more aligned with the introduction of literacy to a primarily oral culture.

The introduction of communities knowledge into information systems is a never ending process and will have unforeseen results for those engaged. The increase of continual changing, merging, or splitting representation of various ontologies will provide an environment that will have the challenge of establishing interconnectivity and interoperability. The providers of IT into communities who wish to participate will have the burden of allowing each community to take their ontological representation to whatever ends they wish to. This may result in a strengthened or weakened cultural identity. Fluid community ontologies will ebb and flow throughout time as it always has through whatever medium it has in the past: from the Australian Aboriginal Dreamtime to the West's Postmodernism.