Yes. Different mail clients deals with the attached form slightly
differently (hope that was the problem you ran into); they may not all
work. That's why I suggested that some might need to go to the website
form to make the response. (02)
However, Bob, I did get your submission (in fact I got it twice.)
Attached is the profile of what got submitted. (03)
Thanks for the response and the feedback. (04)
Leo Obrst wrote Wed, 13 Nov 2002 19:40:46 -0500:
> Thanks, Bob. We'll check into it and correct it shortly. Please bear
> with us and in the meantime, send email, please!
> Bob Smith wrote Wed, 13 Nov 2002 16:30:17 -0800:
>> Hi Leo,The "Submit" button seemed to be ontologically stuck...Thanks,Bob
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-ontology_site22@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:owner-ontology_site22@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Peter P. Yim
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 11:27 AM
>> To: ontolog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [ontolog] ontology tools and an ontology repository?
>> Further to earlier postings on the subject, please respond to the
>> attached survey.
>> Thank you,
>> P.S. In case the attached doesn't work properly with your mail
>> client, the survey is also available at
>> http://ontolog.cim3.org/survey/ontolog1.html (07)
Profile Report (01)
From: "Leo Obrst"
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 05:19
Subject: [ontolog] ontology tools and an ontology repository?
We are considering one possibility for our site: an ontology repository,
wherein folks can register ontologies and/or build ontologies using
Web-enabled tools, possibly hosted at our site.
So some questions: (02)
How do you feel about: (03)
our site supporting an ontology repository? (04)
[X] 1. Yes
[ ] 2. No (05)
our site supporting a Web-enabled ontology tool (for developing ontologies)? (06)
[X] 1. Yes
[ ] 2. No (07)
none of the above. (08)
Not a good idea, because: (Not Answered) (09)
Which ontology tools do you use? (010)
Ontology tool I use/am familiar with: Protege; SemTalk; OntoEdit (011)
Can you characterize the tools: i.e., Web-enabled, ontology
languages supported, cost/licensing, POCs, experience, etc. (012)
Do you know of a tool provider who might support such a public
effort, hosted on our site? (014)
Candidate provider: not yet (015)
Which ontology languages (knowledge representation languages) should
be the standard(s) for the ontologies?
(Some examples: Ontolingua/KIF, Common Logic, OKBC, CycL, RDF/S,
DAML+OIL, OWL, etc.) (016)
"OWL, (Depends on MARKET FEATURES ELABORATED and tested in some
Additional Comments? (018)
"Wish we had some opportunity to discuss some logistic issues at the
Santae Fe Open Session in January." (019)
Question 50MyEmail (020)
My E-mail address is: robsmith5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (021)