> [MD] Are discussions of proprietary technologies (e.g., that compare,
> contrast, evaluate) off limits as well? (01)
[ppy] Not totally, as suggested (ref.
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2007-02/msg00234.html) ...
every now and then, we solicit support from both commercial and
non-commercial institutions, and host events where we waive those
policies in order to help the community gain a proper perspective and
exposure to both open and non-open technologies or products. Those are
the times when we should engage in the discussions of proprietary
technologies. (02)
> [MD] For example, Denny's survey of ontology editors. It would seem
> to be a helpful thing to do. (03)
[ppy] Definitely. That is exactly why we feature events with those
waiver. Take for instance, the "Database and Ontology" mini-series ...
we made such a waiver (ref:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2006-08/msg00069.html#nid07)
thus allowing us to invite people like Oracle to join us in the
discourse. (04)
> [MD] It's like the interoperability summit comparing different
> upper level ontologies to understand them, how they differ, and
> how they might work together. (05)
[ppy] I assume you are referring to the joint NIST-Ontolog Upper
Ontology Summit of Mar.2006 (ref.
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit) ... Yes,
that was very useful. However, if you have noticed, all invited
custodians of key public upper ontologies had "open" products and
technologies, which were the focus of the discourse, in that
particular initiative. (06)
Regards. =ppy
-- (07)
On 9/17/07, Mills Davis <lmd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Peter,
>
> Are discussions of proprietary technologies (e.g., that compare, contrast,
> evaluate) off limits as well?
>
> For example, Denny's survey of ontology editors. It would seem to be a
> helpful thing to do. It's like the interoperability summit comparing
> different upper level ontologies to understand them, how they differ, and
> how they might work together.
>
> Mills
>
>
>
> On Sep 17, 2007, at 10:35 AM, Peter Yim wrote:
>
> All,
>
> Once again,
>
> May I draw people's attention to the Ontolog IPR Policy (see:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid32)
>
> ... and cordially request that we move discussions of proprietary
> technologies (and approaches) offline, or await the events/settings
> when we make prior arrangement to waive the "openness' requirement for
> vendors.
>
> Thank you for your attention.
>
> Regards. =ppy
> Peter Yim
> Co-convener, Ontolog
> --
>
>
> On 9/17/07, Dennis Thomas <dlthomas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Bill,
>
> Yes, you are right. I have given this some thought and realize that I
> should have elaborated on my reply since it is an opportunity differentiate
> our approach from the conventional and accepted approach. Unfortunately, I
> have commitments with an on-going project and cannot respond until this
> evening, which I am eager to do.
>
> Dennis
>
>
>
> On Sep 17, 2007, at 5:46 AM, Bill Andersen wrote:
>
>
> On Sep 17, 2007, at 00:12 , Dennis L. Thomas wrote:
> Randall,
>
> I am aware of the distinctions you defined below, but do not subscribe to
> either of these formal definitions of declarative. To us, what is being
> declared is either theory or reality.
> Dennis,
>
> You are free to have whatever meanings you like in mind when you use words.
> But that makes discourse among educated people a little tough, don'tcha
> think? I'm sure he needs no defending, but Randall's characterization of
> the meaning of the term 'declarative' in computer science is completely
> conventional and accepted by every computer scientist I know. Do you not
> think that would put some pressure on you to adopt a different term than
> 'declarative', especially given the confusion with your use of the term
> 'pre-computation' that has already been covered in this list?
>
> .bill
>
>
> Bill Andersen (andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
> Chief Scientist
> Ontology Works, Inc. (www.ontologyworks.com)
> 3600 O'Donnell Street, Suite 600
> Baltimore, MD 21224
> Office: 410-675-1201
> Cell: 443-858-6444
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>
> Mills Davis
> Managing Director
> Project10X
> 202-667-6400
> 202-255-6655 cel
> 1-800-713-8049 fax
> lmd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> (08)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (09)
|