EB: "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." (01)
It might be so, but for different reasons: (02)
1. It's verbage and rationales are awful, what was clear for the national
bodies representatives. Sorry to say this, but the whole idea of standard
ontology could be downgraded with such a cowboy application. Just read the
title: "... STANDARDIZED CONCEPT SYSTEMS AND SEMANTIC DESCRIPTIONS FOR
MERGED CORE ONTOLOGY (MCO)", and see some rationale: "The ontology has been
used to provide semantic specification of common features for
situational/context awareness, such as Who, What, Where, When. The semantic
foundation was originally developed in the US Army...."
2. Unlike other specific standards as "semantic metadata mapping project",
"metadata framework for interoperability", "metadata registry for semantic
web", etc. , Standard Ontology and Semantics System or Schema is an
extraordinary universal standard, so geographically and politically it
should cover as many countries as possible as Russia, EU, US, Japan, Canada,
all the stakeholders of the Metadata Program of Work
http://jtc1sc32.org/doc/N1801-1850/32N1813-WG2-Report-Vilamoura.pdf
3. The quality of a promoter; like Figaro, Farlance is everywhere, being the
project editors for metadata registries modules, metadata registry
interoperability, and what not. The would-be Standard Ontology and Semantics
Consortium (SOSC) would be able to assign such an intelligent
representative, say from NIST, as Ed. (03)
4. The quality of participants and contributors, see a sample, Standardizing
Upper Ontologies and Data Models, in STANDARD ONTOLOGY; there must be COSMO
and a UK West's model and some other quality upper ontologies. (04)
Participating in the standards bodies as the ISO's Data Management and
Working Group, Metadata, the SOSC should pursue the old line of an IEEE SUO
Standard as well. (05)
All in our hands. As one renowned revolutionary (V. Ulyanov) liked to
repeat: the delay is equivalent to "death" ... of genuine Standard Ontology
and Semantics System (SOSS), really, sos... (06)
Azamat Abdoullaev
http://www.eis.com.cy (07)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Barkmeyer" <edbark@xxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 1:07 AM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] ISO merged ontology effort "MCO" (08)
> 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
>
> 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.
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> 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
>
> "The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
> and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (09)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (010)
|