Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: SUO: *Date 16 Feb 2002




When you state: 'these ontologies are supposed to be based
on some kind of  practice', isn't there a certain vagueness evident? 

The quality 'proven-in-practice' is exactly what some people
are demanding of any candidate UO,
- not a domain ontology together with some assurance
 that its mother and father are both UOs,
- not a vast ontology of everything that comes with an UO
inside somewhere, take-it-or-leave-it.
- not a bland assurance that such-and-such UO is 'widely-used',
 simply repeating the phrase doesn't make it true .

Other qualities could be expected also, such as
unbiased evaluation, repeatability of evaluation, 
necessity of solution X when no other solution is 
as good wrt elaborated end-to-end requirements 
based on the PAR. 
  
Its understandable that individuals will choose
some placeholder ontology *now* , thats an economic
decision. The first one offered is likely to be
accepted, given the fast frugal nature of individual
choice. 

I'll certainly vote no to any proposal offered without
a lot of proof. Look it up anytime under "16 Feb 2002".
Murray Bent
Member, IEEE Standards Association




>From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@virgilio.it>
>To: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@bestweb.net>; "Jon Awbrey" <jawbrey@oakland.edu>
>Cc: "Stand Up Ontology" <standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>
>Sent: 17.febbraio.2002 0.50
>Subject: RE: SUO: *Date 16 Feb 2002
>

>> However, I am sure if a SUO were carved in stone today (e.g. by ISO), it
>> would be redundant in a few weeks time - surely it is possible to agree on
>> a standard v0.1, that once people had chance to play with it would return as
>> v0.1.1 and so on.
>
>
>>This would strike me as far more productive than  non-starters & political
>gaming.
>
>
>I agree (once again).  And  as a matter of fact  I think that Sumo (and Cyc)
>appear particularly  promising (at least to me) precisely because these
>ontologies are supposed to be based on some kind of  practice too.
>All the best. Roberto Bordogna.




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email server is running an evaluation copy of the MailShield anti-
spam software. Please contact your email administrator if you have any
questions about this message. MailShield product info: www.mailshield.com