Dear PatC, (01)
>
> There is one problem I have with this effort at using ontologies to
> help
> define or organize standards; there is as yet no standard for an
> ontology
> that has a enough content to actually represent all the things that the
> non-ontology standards talk about. Apart from the droll situation of a
> community without a standard trying to formalize the knowledge of
> communities with a standard, there is the practical question of whether
> we
> intend to recommend one foundation ontology as the basis for the
> formalization, or take a hands-off position and let a thousand
> incompatible
> flowers bloom? I don't recall whether there is a consensus on this
> point. (02)
[MW] The way I would see it, it is about who is responsible for what, so
rather than having a thousand ontologies for units of measure, we get BIPM,
or the relevant ISO committee they develop their standards through to
develop it, and the rest of us just use it. (03)
Regards (04)
Matthew West
Information Junction
Tel: +44 560 302 3685
Mobile: +44 750 3385279
matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/ (05)
This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England
and Wales No. 6632177.
Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE. (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (07)
|