John, Leo & All: (01)
I'm happy to say that some of what's discussed below is now taking place
at the General Services Administration on the small team I lead. (02)
A contract was recently awarded and the paradigm on which our team will
be building is Information Flow. We believe the Information Flow
paradigm allows us to leverage much of the best research that has taken
place in information theory over the past 50 or so years and focus on
the *normal science* that will make the team productive. (03)
see below for more details ... (04)
John F. Sowa wrote:
> Adrian and Paola,
>
> That is a critical issue that we must face:
> (05)
snip ... (06)
> AW> Also, the software would need a user interface that business
> > folks could understand, without mediation by IT specialists.
>
JS > That would be highly desirable. But that would not be something
> that should be in the standard, because good human factors are
> extremely difficult to do well, and they can be revolutionized
> overnight by a brilliant innovation -- just consider what the
> Wii, the iPod, and the iPhone did to those industries.
>
> For the standard, I believe that we should build on existing
> standards, such as the Metadata Registry, and on well defined
> mathematical systems. Robert Kent's IFF system, for example,
> has been suggested, and I believe that it would be an excellent
> basis. (07)
As above, we find Information Flow an excellent paradigm and recognize
IFF as a significant contribution to resolving many anomalies left
unresolved by the CUO paradigm and responding to the information sharing
crisis. For more on my unqualified, seat of the pants, opinion on the
post CUO crisis, see (08)
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2007-08/msg00306.html (09)
JS > However, the full details of category theory, etc., are
> more than even IT specialists should have to learn. (010)
Yes, but what fun is that ! (011)
For those who are interested, I find "Category Theory for Beginners" a
pretty useful jump start ... (012)
http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~sme/presentations/cat101.pdf (013)
In addition to Category Theory, the sections on algebraic specifications
provide useful insights. (014)
JS > That is why I believe some agency should sponsor efforts to build
> prototypes that include the high-powered math under the covers.
> And those prototypes (preferably in a design competition) should
> be built as open-source *research* projects. Then any commercial
> vendor could adopt and adapt the winning system in an industrial-
> strength version. (015)
The work products we create will be open sourced under an Open Source
EGov Reference Architecture (OSERA) license. I can provide more details
on derivative works, etc. at a later date. (016)
Artifacts you can expect to see will include an updated version of the
Federal Enterprise Architecture Reference Model Ontology (FEA-RMO) and
the Federal Transition Framework (FTF). (017)
Please note the relevance of these artifacts to the recently released IC
Information Sharing Architecture that specifies a close relation to the
FEA. We believe these artifacts will be very useful to researchers and
industry partners supporting Federal agencies and the IC. We hope to
fuel innovation by making these artifacts available to all ! (018)
JS > For example, relational databases use very sophisticated indexing
> mechanisms, but the IT specialist can ask a question in SQL and
> a non-specialist could use an English-like interface without
> being aware of the underlying math.
>
>
> John
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> (019)
For more on us and what we're up to, feel free to check out our Roadmap
for Semantics on Netcentric EA here: (020)
http://osera.modeldriven.org/documents/Roadmap%20for%20Semantics%20in%20Netcentric%20Enterprise%20Architecture.pdf (021)
Comments are welcome, especially the Chu Space approach to ontology
alignment and unification. I'm happy discuss more both on an off-line ! (022)
--
Best wishes, (023)
Rick (024)
email: rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
web: http://www.rickmurphy.org
blog: http://spout.rickmurphy.org
cell: 703-201-9129 (025)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (026)
|