Hey Andreas (01)
Great to hear from you (02)
>>since June??
that's an eternity in internet time. I feel compelled to make an open
criticism of how the journal reviews business sadly can sometimes slow
down and hinders scientific progress, rather than promoting it (making
the case for an open research group I guess) (03)
I am not sure what is slowing down the publication, but I can guess
thet it's a project very difficult to review, therefore, it's stalled,
but the consequences of this delays can be dramatic on the progress
sector as a whole.
How many projects, I wonder, are stagnating because the system cant
digest/process them?
Assuming your work is good, or not so good, until it's published the
public will not be able to contribute it to and make it better. I know
that academic careers are built upon journal articles, but even
presuming your project is only half good, and may need refinement and
further work - wouldn't this best done by a community rather than by
waiting for the acceptance or rejection of a journal editor? (with
due respect). (04)
Basically, I wonder if there is a parallel community
evaluation/consultation process for these important projects. while
the editors make their mind up about their publication schedules of
the article, is there a way that we can start working with it?
(enough of that) (05)
> However, we are working on composable web services to support heterogeneous
> operations (such as different organizations of different nations). Although
> the application grew out of the Modeling & Simulation Defense sector, the
> underlying technology can be applied for every other domain that requires
> coordination, alignment, and harmonization between individual processes,
> services, components, etc. What I can do is attach some Journal and
> referenced conference proceedings dealing with the topic, including the
> slideset of an invited presentation I gave on the stage of the Joint Forces
> Command booth on the I/ITSEC Showfloor (December 2006, Orlando, FL).
> The main idea is to work from information exchange requirements of working
> processes towards a federated data schema towards a common data engineering
> process towards a common ontology. We use the "Levels of Conceptual
> Interoperability Model (LCIM)" as the underlying model, which is used in
> several international projects and was awarded by the Simulation
> Interoperability Standards Organization. (06)
Great stuff, I ll start a resource library somewhere and and start
posting documents, so if anyone else has got related materials and
links please send them them to me also offlist (07)
> I hope the papers are helpful to see where we are going. (08)
It's a start (09)
If there is interest, we can talk about this in more detail, for
example in one of the
> ontolog-forum presentations. (010)
Look forward (011)
PDM (012)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (013)
|