[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Making the Ontology Summit content Accessible

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 13:12:09 -0400
Message-id: <4E4AA4E9.2000001@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On 8/15/2011 11:43 AM, Ali Hashemi wrote:
> My main objection to a wiki was exactly the lack of that versatility
> that you mention is now available. Going to a site that has the look and
> feel of a wiki is good for some things, but wholly inappropriate for
> many others.    (01)

I agree.  Email lists, such as Ontolog Forum and many others, have
proved to be useful for many purposes since long before the WWW
came along.  And those of us who participate in Ontolog Forum are
"voting by our feet" by continuing to participate in this forum.    (02)

As just one example, consider the current thread for an ontology
of self-interest.  Much of that discussion consists of controversial
items that nobody, not even the authors would want to preserve for
posterity.  But from time to time, there have been useful paragraphs
and references that most of the participants would want to move to
a wiki article on that subject.    (03)

For the Ontology Summit, it would be good to have multiple articles
in the wiki on a variety of related issues.  Then the primary article
about the 2011 summit could point to each of those articles and to
the info about all preceding summits.    (04)

For anybody who wants to find info, the SMW software is based on the
Wikipedia software, and it's just as easy to use.  But the ability
to use the wiki for ongoing R & D projects would enable us to write
and modify the articles without the restrictions imposed by Wikipedia.    (05)

We need a wiki that serves as a home for ongoing R & D projects,
which people who want info about those projects can use in the same
way as Wikipedia, but which the developers of the info can update
and extend as they please.    (06)

But I would still prefer email for ongoing debates.  The wiki
articles should be more like a "local consensus" by the
developers of each project.  The Google software for editing
documents is designed to produce a finished document.    (07)

But I think the wiki format is more useful for    (08)

  1. Editing the consensus by a group of developers who make
     updates at a slower pace than the Google software supports.    (09)

  2. Making the current *local* consensus available to anybody
     in the world who would like to see the current status.    (010)

John    (011)

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    (012)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>