Pat, (01)
My sense of purpose for the CCT-Representation project is to get a
foot into the standards world. I want to engage the Protege crowd and
get their support. As such, anything that may be perceived negatively,
let's put them away. (02)
I'm sure we all agree that it's time we make some real progress ...
and not just provoke interesting argument. (03)
Have a nice trip to Boston. We'll miss you at the Thursday call. Talk
to you when you're back! (04)
Cheers. -ppy
-- (05)
Patrick Cassidy wrote Sun, 02 May 2004 05:34:53 -0400: (06)
> Peter,
> The question that I would pose which might be of general interest
> to other Protege people (and might not) is whether Protege
> could function as an interlingua to translate other ontology
> formats into each other -- even those that have ternary and
> higher relations. The latter may be anathema to the
> OKBC/OWL/description-language enthusiasts, but I think the
> question is a legitimate one, given the popularity of
> Protege.
>
> I will not be able to call in this week, I will be at the
> NAACL meeting in Boston. See you in two weeks.
>
> Pat
>
>
> ============== (07)
> Peter Yim wrote:
>
>> Bob,
>>
>> Thank you for getting this going.
>>
>> One suggestion, if you could respond to Natasha on behalf of [ontolog]
>> and say that,
>>
>> ... among other projects we have one that we are planning to develop
>> an ontology (the core component types for ebXML, to be specific, which
>> we intend to submit to UN/CEFACT for adoption) with the normative
>> representation expressed in KIF. We also have plans to export that KIF
>> ontology into Protege, and, through Protege, get it mapped into OWL,
>> UML, XSD, ... etc. We would like to tell people about our project, and
>> to engage those with the right expertise to help us with this exercise
>> -- which is of very high strategic importance as we are attempting to
>> introduce the International Standards community to the ontological
>> engineering approach. ... etc. etc.
>>
>> Thanks & regards,
>> PPY
>> --
>>
>>
>> Natasha Noy wrote Fri, 30 Apr 2004 17:25:19 -0700:
>>
>>> Dear Bob,
>>>
>>> It's great to hear that many members of your working group will
>>> attend the conference! As for the workshop, it is not clear from your
>>> message if the workshop would be of interest primarily for members of
>>> the Ontolog Group or in general for the protege community. Our goal
>>> for the workshops is to provide a forum for representatives of
>>> different groups to exchange ideas on some specific topic. If there
>>> is something along these lines, we can consider it (although I will
>>> need to find out if we can still reserve one more room). If it is
>>> more of a meeting for your working group, than having it as a
>>> conference workshop would be less appropriate. What did you have in
>>> mind?
>>>
>>>
>>> Natasha
>>>
>>> On Apr 30, 2004, at 10:45 AM, Bob Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello Natasha,
>>>>
>>>> The Ontolog group is collaborative web working group of several
>>>> dozen individuals. During our weekly session yesterday we discovered
>>>> that as many as a dozen of our members may be attending the 7th
>>>> Protégé Conference in Bethesda.
>>>> Do you know if it Is it possible to arrange an additional Workshop
>>>> for our Ontolog Group on the afternoon Tuesday, July 6th? The
>>>> heading on your website indicates that the list is "subject to
>>>> change". Thanks for your consideration !!
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Bob Smith,
>>>> Professor Emeritus, CSU
>>>> --------------------
>>>> Tall Tree Labs
>>>> robsmith5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
> (08)
_________________________________________________________________
To Post: mailto:ontolog-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-admin/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/ (09)
|