Patrick Cassidy wrote:
> FYI: Result of 'MCO' study on a standard upper ontology:
> Proposal not adopted.
> The issue is still important, and I would suggest we continue this thread
> for a while.
>
> Pat
>
> Doc No: 2N1854
> Replaces: --
> Doc Type: Summary of voting/Table of Replies
> Date: 2009-04-12
> Title: Summary of Voting on 32N1833 Request for SC32/WG2 study period
> on standardized concept systems and semantic descriptions for merged core
> ontology (MCO) as proposed in 32N1807 Due Date: -
> Pages: 3
> Source: SC32 Secretariat
> Project: 1.32.02
> Status: proposed SC32 resolution is not adopted due to insufficient
> number of P-members voting (JTC1 Directives, 9.1.10)
> Action: FYI (01)
Thanks, Pat.
Interestingly, the proposal was defeated by lack of quorum -- too few
national bodies sent in their ballots. That suggests that there is
little interest in such a standard. Another tempest in a teapot. (02)
-Ed (03)
--
Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
National Institute of Standards & Technology
Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Tel: +1 301-975-3528
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 FAX: +1 301-975-4694 (04)
"The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
and have not been reviewed by any Government authority." (05)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (06)
|