Re: U.S. DoD WG expresses interest in upper ontologies
On Thursday 20 March 2008 14:53, Azamat wrote:
> Thursday, March 20, 2008 3:20 PM, Gian Piero Zarri wrote,
> ''... given the conceptual differences among the "upper levels" of
> models like DOLCE, CYC, Conceptual Graphs, SUMO, NKRL etc., the
> search for a Standard Upper Ontology seems to me like the search for
> some sort of ontological Holy Graal.''
>
> This doesn't make an argument. Try and find better one.
>
> Jim, I think the SUO WG should preclude any involvement with the U.S.
> department of Defence as well as any other DODs. It must be nobler
> way to get funding. regards,
> azamat abdoullaev
I sense you infer some sort of moral taint to the work if it is
supported by the U.S. DoD. That does not really follow. (Is the
Internet so tainted because it was solely funded through all its early
years by ARPA / DARPA?) They are not commissioning work on arms. Nor
will seeking support for the work of creating a generic upper ontology
elsewhere preclude DoD or its suppliers from using the results of that
work for purposes of which you don't approve.
Randall Schulz