RE: SUO: RE: Copyright issues
Chris,
Thanks for explaining. I guess I had lost track of the context of your
statements. To summarize, I believe that the bulk of discussion on the SUO
list should be change proposals on the two starter documents (as well as
any future starter documents). That would consist of new text or KIF
statements, or changes to existing content. Some more general discussion
of things like methodology is certainly appropriate, but the balance of
messages currently is grossly weighted to topics that are quite distant
from any particular, concrete change or addition to a starter document,
which I feel is the wrong balance.
Adam
At 04:02 PM 6/5/2002 +0200, Chris Partridge wrote:
>Adam,
>
>I am a little surprised that you are unclear. Your response suggested that
>you welcome ''not only changes to specific existing axioms but new ones of
>course'. This leaves a number of areas uncovered. For example, what strategy
>one should adopt, what methodology etc. It would also seem to exclude
>discussions that did not take place directly in terms of axioms - a point
>you made in an earlier email to me.
>
>Chris
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-standard-upper-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org
>[mailto:owner-standard-upper-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Adam
>Pease
>Sent: 05 June 2002 17:15
>To: Chris Partridge; standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
>Cc: Pierluigi Miraglia
>Subject: RE: SUO: RE: Copyright issues
>
>
>
>Chris,
>
>At 08:59 AM 6/5/2002 +0200, Chris Partridge wrote:
>
>
>
>[snip]
>
> >Adam clarified this.
> >CP1>I would appreciate a little more detail on what the process for taking
> >the
> > >document forward might be. I was a little surprised that the SUMO
>proposers
> > >wanted all development restricted to ONLY suggestions to amendments to
> > >specific axioms.
> >AP>Just to clarify, the SUMO document is under the control of the group.
> >The
> >SUMO proposers have no veto power. Personally, we would welcome not only
> >changes to specific existing axioms but new ones of course.
> >
> >CP2> Then it appears that the SUMO proposers have a restricted welcome to
> >'not only changes to specific existing axioms but new ones of course'
>rather
> >than an unrestricted one.
> >
>
>I'm unclear at what you consider to be a restriction. Could you clarify?
>
>[snip]
>
>
>Adam Pease
>Teknowledge
>(650) 424-0500 x571
Adam Pease
Teknowledge
(650) 424-0500 x571