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.
Now this has died the death, I can with a clear conscience
reveal that the initiative for this ISO merging of merged upper ontologies came
from the US Army, in the person of Jim Schoening, who has been active in
promoting "Upper" ontologies for some time now (including the
granddaddy of them, SUMO).
The motivation, among US Government agencies, for seeking
ISO certification, is not to establish a New World Order that all must obey, or
indeed to impose upon anyone else in any way at all. It is simply that there is
a broad Government mandate to use ISO standards where possible, so that
anything that has achieved ISO standardization status is easier to get funded,
easier to get supported and easier to "sell" to other agencies. ISO
standardization, amazingly enough, is a potent aid towards achieving interoperability
within the US government, as well as outside it.
[MW] This is true not only for the US Govt, but also the UK and
many others, as well as between industry partners (and competitors). Despite
the difficulties of standardisation it is one of the best ways of achieving
Failure in this way suggest to me more political naivety
than anything else. Most standardisers know (or should know) that you have to
make sure you have supporters in the required number of countries before
you ask the question. This may involve some active lobbying. Otherwise you don’t
Tel: +44 560 302 3685
Mobile: +44 750 3385279
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.