Oops! (re. last msg) typo in the file name, it should have been:
<OMG_OntoIOp_spec_v0-55_snapshot--TillMossakowski_20140520f.pdf> (and
not OMG_OntoIOp_spec_v0-55_snapshot--TillMossakowski_20140507f.pdf )
- therefore, that version is:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntoIOp/Team_confcall/2014-05-21_team-confcall_n.59/OMG_OntoIOp_spec_v0-55_snapshot--TillMossakowski_20140520f.pdf (01)
Anyhow, Till's latest update (which he distributed about half an hour
ago), which is probably the one to use for today's meeting now, is:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntoIOp/Team_confcall/2014-05-21_team-confcall_n.59/OMG_OntoIOp_spec_v0-55_snapshot--TillMossakowski_20140521g.pdf (02)
Regards. =ppy
-- (03)
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> For tomorrow's call ...
>
> The WD snapshot attached in Till's opening post is also available now
> as:
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntoIOp/Team_confcall/2014-05-21_team-confcall_n.59/OMG_OntoIOp_spec_v0-55_snapshot--TillMossakowski_20140507f.pdf
>
> I've also taken the opportunity to correct the subject line as well
> ("Wed 2014.05.21" instead of "Wed 20143.05.21")
>
> Regards. =ppy
> --
>
>
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Tara Athan <taraathan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi - I have a few comments on the definitions:
>>
>> basic OMS
>>
>> set of non-logical symbols, sentences, annotations about them, which is used
>> as a building block for a larger OMS
>>
>> Are the sentences in a basic OMS all in the same language?
>> Can an OMS be a basic OMS without being used as a building block for a
>> larger OMS?
>>
>> Suggestion: a structure consisting of a set V of non-logical symbols, a set
>> S of sentences in some OMS language (using only non-logical symbols from V),
>> and a set of annotations about V and S.
>>
>> sublanguage
>>
>> syntactically speci?ed subset of a given language, consisting of a subset of
>> its terminal and nonterminal symbols and grammar rules
>>
>> A subset of the grammar rules of a language does not necessarily produce a
>> sublanguage (not all grammar languages are monotonic, e.g. Relax NG), and a
>> sublanguage can't always be generated by some subset of the grammar rules of
>> a superlanguage (e.g. a Horn logic sublanguage of Common Logic).
>>
>> I believe grammar rules should not be mentioned at all in this definition.
>>
>> I would expect a sublanguage to be defined as:
>> subset of the expressions of a language, interpreting with a subset of the
>> logics of the superlanguage.
>> Note: the subsets need not be proper subsets.
>>
>> subOMS
>>
>> OMS whose sets of non-logical symbols and sentences are subsets of those
>> present in a given larger OMS
>>
>> Saying "larger OMS" suggests that there is a requirement of proper subsets.
>>
>> Suggestion:
>>
>> OMS whose sets of non-logical symbols and sentences are subsets of those
>> present in a given OMS
>>
>>
>> profile
>>
>> (syntactic) sublanguage of an OMS language interpreting according to a
>> particular logic that targets speci?c applications or reasoning methods
>>
>> Can a sublanguage be a profile if it doesn't target specific applications or
>> reasoning methods? How do you verify that this condition is satisfied?
>>
>> Suggestion:
>>
>> (syntactic) sublanguage of an OMS language interpreting according to a
>> particular logic, typically targeting speci?c applications or reasoning
>> methods
>>
>>
>>
>> serialization
>>
>> speci?c syntactic encoding of a given OMS language
>>
>> Not all "serializations" are specific to the level of character encoding.
>> If the serialization is based on XML, then a variety of character encoding
>> systems can, in general, be used. In API4KB, we consider a "serialization"
>> of a language to be a system for representing expressions in that language
>> as character sequences, which is independent of the character encoding
>> system used to represent these character sequences as byte sequences.
>>
>> document
>>
>> result of serializing an OMS using a given serialization
>>
>> This makes sense only if we are talking about an OMS in one language, so
>> that it is possible to serialize using just one serialization.
>> Presumably, each base OMS in a structured OMS is serialized using a given
>> serialization (although annotations in standoff markup confuse this issue).
>> Can a document be a collection of subdocuments in different serializations
>> of the same language?
>> (I am imagining these being packaged in a zip archive or tar for
>> transmission.)
>>
>> Suggestion:
>>
>> result of serializing an OMS, where the sentences of each basic OMS are
>> serialized using a given serialization
>>
>>
>>
>> Tara
>
>
>> On 5/20/14 1:36 PM, Till Mossakowski wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> our next OntoIOp team conference call (n.59) is coming up this
>> Wednesday, May-21.
>>
>> Please find the most recent version of the standard draft attached.
>> All new parts have been marked in red. Please have a look, so that we go
>> through them during the teleconference.
>>
>> Source of the standard document and the issue tracker can be found at
>> https://github.com/tillmo/DOL/
>>
>> All the best,
>> Till
>>
>>
>> = OntoIOp team-confcall (n.59) - Wed 2014.05.21 =
>>
>> * Date: Wed 21-May-2014
>> * start-time: 8:00am PDT / 11:00 pm EDT / 4:00pm BST / 5:00pm CEST /
>> 5:00pm SAST / 0:00am [+1] KST / 15:00 UTC
>> ** ref. world clock -
>>
>http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=5&day=21&year=2014&hour=8&min=0&sec=0&p1=224
>> * Duration: 0.75~1.5 Hrs.
>> * shared-file workspace:
>>
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntoIOp/Team_confcall/2014-05-21_team-confcall_n.59/
>> * chat-workspace: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/ontoiop_20140521
>>
>>
>> Remarks:
>>
>> * the session may be recorded for archival purposes. Unless
>> otherwise documented, participants agrees to this by virtue of
>> their participation at the session.
>>
>> * In case we have to mute everyone (due to extraneous noise or echo)
>> - Mute control: *7 to un-mute ... *6 to mute
>>
>> Dial-in:
>> * Phone (US): +1 (206) 402-0100
>> ... when prompted enter Conference ID: 141184#
>> * Skype: "joinconference"
>> ... when prompted enter Conference ID: 141184#
>> ** in case your skype connection to "joinconference" is not holding
>> up, try using (your favorite POTS or VoIP line, etc.) either your
>> phone, skype-out or google-voice and
>> call the US dial-in number: +1 (206) 402-0100
>> ... when prompted enter Conference ID: 141184#
>> ** some local numbers may be available (in the US, Australia, Canada &
>> UK) - see: http://instantteleseminar.com/Local/
>> ** for Windows Skype users: Can't find Skype Dial pad? ... it may be
>> under the "Call" dropdown menu as "Show Dial pad"
>> ** for Linux Skype users: if the dialpad button is not shown in the
>> call window you need to press the "d" hotkey to enable it. (--CLange)
>>
>>
>> Talk to you all then!
>> (04)
_________________________________________________________________
To Post: mailto:ontoiop-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontoiop-forum/
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontoiop-forum/
Community Files (open): http://interop.cim3.net/file/pub/OntoIOp/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntoIOp (05)
|