I'm impressed with your browser. It's wonderful. (02)
I wasn't able to open your <sumo-1.36classes-Chinese.pdf> file ...
(maybe because I don't have a Chinese-capable acrobat reader.) (03)
Kurt and I have already established that we shouldn't use the wiki to
capture/represent any hierarchical structures; and decided that we
should leverage its capabilities in:
(a) hyperlinking, and
(b) ease-of-collaborative-editing (04)
Looks like, your browser is doing a much better job with (a). Let us
go back to the drawing board and see/justify if and how we should
employ the wiki to advance our cause. ... Comments, suggestions
solicited (especially from those who advocated its use earlier.) (05)
Adam Pease wrote Tue, 15 Jul 2003 07:43:11 -0700:
> We'll ultimately need the functionality of an ontology browser. Why
> not run an existing browser and then we'll have hyperlinked listings of
> axioms and a hierarchy view already? You can get a free web-based
> browser that's easy to install from
> You can see it running live at <http://virtual.cvut.cz/kifb/en/>. That
> browser also addresses the multiple language presentation issue. It
> already handles a German presentation. There's a Chinese version of the
> SUMO hierarchy on line at
> As far as the naming convention, SUMO uses InterCaps.
> At 11:41 PM 7/14/2003 -0700, Kurt Conrad wrote:
>> Peter and I set up the Invoice concept Wiki page. It can be found at
>> The approach that we took was to first consolidate the various
>> definitions of Invoice that have been passed around. Once we have
>> settled on the "official" Ontolog definition for invoice, we expect
>> that the material copied from forum postings can be removed.
>> We thought about trying to reflect some sort of structure (e.g., class
>> hierarchy) either on the concept page or across concept pages. This
>> proved to be problematic for a number of reasons. As a result, the
>> Wiki page includes a Related Concepts section, but the concepts are
>> only listed without any regard to the ways that they are related.
>> As we populated the Related Concepts section with examples, we
>> identified a number of issues which should be addressed by the team in
>> the near term. The most critical ones are:
>> 1) Determining the naming conventions that we will use for the
>> concepts. A number of alternatives are listed on the Wiki page.
>> 2) Ensuring that the concepts that we are defining map cleanly to the
>> concepts identified by the UBL committee. Toward this end, I
>> populated the Related Concepts section with the concepts listed in the
>> appropriate version 0.7 analysis spreadsheet.
>> A Specifications has also been provided. Although it isn't populated
>> at this time, we expect it to contain (or link) to matching
>> representations (Protoge, KIF, XML Schema, etc.).
>> Please review this page with an eye to using the resulting page
>> structure as a model for "all" concept pages.
>> /s/ kwc 2003.07.14 23:41
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To Post:
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To Post:
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (09)