[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] structuring our discourse [was - Re: The Relation Betwee

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Peter Yim" <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 18:50:34 -0800
Message-id: <af8f58ac0703171950k231047c6x1bd52e998fb2b7bc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Duane and Paola,    (01)

> [DN]  Is the Ontolog Forum set up to produce work like *this*?    (02)

[ppy]  I probably would need a clarification on what you mean by
*this* before I can provide a proper answer.    (03)

I think we are doing exactly that right now. ...    (04)

1. For our discourse, we've got our e-mail forums, which are assigned
for 'general' (as in [ontolog-forum]) or specialized
([ontolog-invitation], [ontology-summit], [health-ont],
[ontologizing],  ...) discussion purposes.    (05)

1a. And, within each forum (which is essentially our "conversation"
workspace), we have discussion threads, where one could specify the
subject matter (by creating a meaningful "subject line"), and through
that, set a scope for the discourse.    (06)

2. Through the 5+ years of our existence, we have had projects (like
CCT-Representation, NHIN-Response, ONION, ...), mini-series' (like
OntologizingOntolog, Database&Ontology,
OntologyMeasurement&Evaluation, ...), panel sessions (like
OntologyApplicationInEmergencyManagement, Ontology in Service Oriented
Architecture, ...) and major collaborative initiative (like
UpperOntologySummit, and the ongoing OntologySummit2007)    (07)

3. We do have a mechanism to start new projects too. (see:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1Y).    (08)

Therefore, even if its not ideal, I trust we do have the process (and
field experience) to split our ontology discourse into rather
meaningful 'tracks' already.    (09)

Obviously, a discourse in "The Relation Between Logic and Ontology in
Metaphysics" is not for everyone, so is "Ontology Application in
Emergency Management" or "ebXML Core Component Type Representation in
FOL."  ... and therefore, we don't have everyone in the community
coming to all the synchronous virtual events, or engaging in every
single discussion thread (when our members exercise their own free
choice.)    (010)

We have, and do value, a diverse community. ... Given that, to
minimize mismatches between participants and the discourse they engage
in, our answer could be as simple as:    (011)

(i)  (for those who are initiating things) - making sure we choose our
project title/charter, event topics, discussion thread subject line
properly, and    (012)

(ii) (for those who are exercising their choice to engage) - picking
the right projects, discussion threads and events to participate and
contribute to.    (013)

Thanks & regards.  =ppy
--    (014)

On 3/17/07, Duane Nickull <dnickull@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Peter:
> Is the Ontolog Forum set up to produce work like this?  I think I would be
> interested in working on a few things like this.
> Duane    (015)

> On 3/17/07 10:08 AM, "paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx" <paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > Yes Duane
> >
> > SIG is special interest group
> >
> > I think that while we should continue to confront the differences on
> > the list, to make sure nobody forgets plurality of views is a
> > fundamental aspect of reality that needs to be modelled in everything
> > that humans do,  maybe some of the more specialised discussions will
> > benefit from being developed by niche groups (lets have the
> > mathematicians have their own world where they can build and destroy
> > reality as they see fit without having everyone else to blank out)
> >
> > I wonder if we should split some of this ontology discourse into
> > 'tracks' and attempt to pursue more specialisation and elicit summary
> > deliverables that can be then shared by all after some conclusion has
> > been reached, instead of hoping that everyone can understand everyone
> > else's viewpoint all the time.
> >
> > Dunno, thinking......
> >
> > Paola DM    (016)

> > On 3/17/07, Duane Nickull <dnickull@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Paola:
> >>
> >> What did you mean by SIG?  Special interest group?  I have pondered the 
> >> that there is a lot of collective genius on this forum and often wish there
> >> was some way to capture some of the knowledge and package it into white
> >> papers, recommendation etc.
> >>
> >> If so, is that what you had in mind?  How would it look to you?
> >>
> >> Duane
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> Maybe we should start a SIG
> >>
> >> --
> >> **********************************************************
> >> Sr. Technical Evangelist - Adobe Systems, Inc.           *
> >> Chair - OASIS SOA Reference Model Technical Committee    *
> >> Blog: http://technoracle.blogspot.com                    *
> >> Music: http://www.mix2r.com/audio/by/artist/duane_nickull*
> >> **********************************************************    (017)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (018)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [ontolog-forum] structuring our discourse [was - Re: The Relation Between Logic and Ontology in Metaphysics]], Peter Yim <=