the ontology community,
have now established the overall objective for this year's ontology summit
) and the following conversation breakout suggests itself. What might be
productive is to have people sign up for one or more of these aspects of the
problem, with the aim of producing some concrete results and recommendations
prior to the face-to-face meeting. Specifically:
of existing ontological representations of standards, along with their
associated definitions – conformance classes, testing suites and
- identification and outreach:
that should participate or be represented, e.g. NATO, UN/CEFACT, ISO,
OAGi, NCBO, OASIS,
1. What is
the role of an ontology in establishing a standard?
2. What kind of constraints or rules [standards?] should be applied
to ontologies that are used to establish a standard?
kinds of standards lend themselves to the use of ontologies as their
ontological languages are best suited to represent standards?
vision and roadmap
Articulating a stretch vision, and the steps needed to get there.
What do we think information standards are going to look like 20 years from
now? Who are the movers to get us there? Who are the enablers and
stakeholders? This is an environment where we can be bold.
encourage everyone to identify themselves with one or more of these
activities, and we can set up wiki pages to hold the results. Just as last
year, we will especially need people to synthesize the conversations under
each of these activities on a wiki page, as we proceed. If we divide up
these tasks, we can make a significant contribution in a short time, without
having to abandon our day jobs!
how much we can accomplish together.
Steven R. Ray,
Systems Integration Division
of Standards & Technology