JS: Great! Then let's do it.
> Our first task should be to pull together the various suggestions that
> people have proposed in this forum and organize them into a coherent
> statement of requirements and proposed formats and methodology for meeting
> those requirements.
> It's much easier to specify a useful framework than to fill it with
> content. But there are a lot of people who have content, and if we define
> a suitable framework and have a place to store content, we can begin by
> providing a kind of "facebook" for ontologies. (01)
That's a great plus. Indeed, for last two decades there have been developed
high-class ontology content, both upper levels and domain ontologies,
standing in a pressing need of an integrative framework. A minus, hope
insignificant, a good willing of all the upper ontology content holders and
the project leaders: CYC, OBO Foundry, DOLCE, West' ISO 15926, NeOn, etc;.
For, as we agreed, everybody capable to contribute must be invited. Caveat
or incentive: lack of any of them hardly could stop the project advancement,
but "strength and knowledge power in unity"; more content will facilitate
the project realization, an unprecedented project in the history of science
and technology, i'd say.
Without loosing too much time, I suggest to decide the following issues of
the OPO:
1. Aims and Scopes
2. Strategy&Policy&Procedures
3. Structure and Funding (02)
To define the strategic goal of the Project: standard ontology framework?
unified modeling framework? ontology and semantic standards? semantic
interoperability? open ontology library? (03)
To establish a legal entity:
International Group (Body, Panel) for Ontology and Semantic Standards
(IGOSS) or (IBOSS), including members, corporate and individual, from USA,
EU, and Russia. (04)
To establish a special web portal, like wisely done by the OBO Foundry. I am
ready to share a domain taken: http://www.standardontology.org
The IGOSS activities may scope the special programs:
Ontology Standards and Knowledge Sources (Wikipedia);
Ontology Standards, Metadisciplinary Science and Technology and Common
Research Area;
Ontology Standards and Semantic Interoperability;
Ontology Standards and domain ontologies and modeling languages;
Ontology Standards and Semantic Web Technologies (Language standards, rule
technologies);
Ontology Standards and Industry Standards;
Ontology Standards and Business Process Interoperability. (05)
To specify the sources of public funding, like EC FP7 programs, the US NSF,
NIST, etc.
Azamat Abdoullaev
PS:
Last but not least, to avoid any adverse criticism, like that one
http://ontology.buffalo.edu/bfo/west.pdf, but acting as one legal entity for
one big purpose. Any existent upper ontology or general data model,
naturally having conceptual gaps and constructive defects, could be
disproved. After all, this is why we are to integrate our world models, to
obtain consistency and comprehensiveness. (06)
----- Original Message -----
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 5:49 AM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology Project Organization: (07)
> Pat and Azamat,
>
> I am amazed that we somehow fell into a violent agreement.
>
> PC> Surprisingly, I can't find anything in what John has said
> > to disagree with. In particular, I agree that all plausible
> > paths to enhancing the utility of ontologies should be explored
> > - and better yet, funded. I think that the anticipated economic
> > benefits easily justify the costs.
>
> We can do a great deal with minimal funding.
>
> PC> On the issue of a repository - yes, I think that's a good idea.
> > The ontology Summit in 2008 started work on that, but a specific
> > project hasn't been funded and as a consequence is moving very slowly.
>
> It's much easier to specify a useful framework than to fill it with
> content. But there are a lot of people who have content, and if we
> define a suitable framework and have a place to store content, we
> can begin by providing a kind of "facebook" for ontologies.
>
> PC> I think Mike Gruninger has put in a lot of work, but I am not
> > aware if a specific site has been identified.
>
> We could begin with Peter's site, which we've been filling up
> with email. Some ontology content would be even better.
>
> PC> I do think that a common FO is one of the more promising
> > possibilities, without deprecating any of the others.
>
> That's fine with me. I promise that I won't deprecate the goal
> of working toward an FO -- provided that we also accept whatever
> lower level domain ontologies that people want to post on the site.
>
> PC> So I suggest a project to develop one with a large enough
> > community of users.
>
> We can begin by providing a one-stop shopping center for open
> source ontologies of any kind. That should draw a fair community
> of users, contributors, and testers.
>
> JFS>> The best we can do is to organize all of them in a common
> >> framework and let the researchers and developers use them, test them,
> >> relate them, combine them, extend them, refine them, and demonstrate
> >> how and whether they can support the goals we would like to achieve.
> >> Do you know anything better we could do?
>
> AA> No, I have nothing at this time. I have to agree with your very
> > sensible and feasable proposal. Just one wish, to hurry with its
> > implementation, otherwise we have a bad/good chance to suffer the
> > unwelcome "standards" imposed by self-appointed standards bodies.
>
> Great! Then let's do it.
>
> Our first task should be to pull together the various suggestions that
> people have proposed in this forum and organize them into a coherent
> statement of requirements and proposed formats and methodology for
> meeting those requirements.
>
> John
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (08)
_________________________________________________________________
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)
|