Re: SUO: Procedural question
All,
Bill asked about the end game for SUO. As I see it, the final
objective is an IEEE-approved standard upper ontology that a significant
size and number of markets adopt.
He also asked about a winner amongst our growing list of starter
documents.
As I see it, IFF (assuming it makes progress, builds consensus,
and grows a user base) should probably split off as a separate document
with a new PAR, since it doesn't really address the current PAR. Within
IEEE, a single working group can have multiple PARs, so the work can stay
in the SUO WG, but with a new PAR.
As I see it, SUMO (assuming it makes progress, builds consensus,
and grows a user base), OpenCyc, or any other contenders would either
need to merge or face off.
Jim Schoening
On Tue, 07 May 2002 23:17:04 -0400 Bill Andersen
<andersen@ontologyworks.com> writes:
>
>
> Folks,
>
> Does anyone know what the "end game" is for SUO? How is a "winner"
> to be
> selected, by what criteria, and when?
>
> .bill
>
> --
> Bill Andersen
> Chief Scientist, Ontology Works
> 1132 Annapolis Road, Suite 104
> Odenton, Maryland, 21113
> Mobile: 443-858-6444
> Office: 410-674-7600
> Web: http://www.ontologyworks.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.