[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Solving the information federation problem

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 13:47:06 -0700
Message-id: <CAGdcwD09-thRUg-Wv9+Jjf4SatPtQoi91yzLFR6Ts5rLz0uyFA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
That's good, David!    (01)

I guess we were referring to different 'targets' with respect to what
Cory was calling people to "get on with."    (02)

You, as you indicate now, are talking about developing standards,
practices and reference implementations.    (03)

I, consistent with the Ontolog charter, am actually talking about
discussing, identifying issues, and (as you correctly pointed out)
'instigating' ... and, being a contender to tackle the subject matter
brought up by Cory.    (04)

Cheers. =ppy
--    (05)

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 1:05 PM, David Price <dprice@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> On 10/27/2011 6:21 PM, Peter Yim wrote:
> Considering the percentage of data that Cory has in mind now residing
> *on* vs *off* the web, it does not necessarily follow that this
> problem belongs in the W3C either.
> Over time more and more data is clearly on the Web/Internet, so looking
> forward the W3C makes more sense to me than anywhere else.
> I think the problem belongs to the few who care enough to push the
> agenda, and a community whose members are willing to put their smarts
> into tackling it.
> Exactly why I suggest the W3C, there are already WGs working aspects of the
> problem while the OMG cannot get an RFP out the door and Ontolog is talking
> about talking about it. I have no doubt that the Ontolog Forum might have a
> lot to usefully say about the matter. However, when I suggested something as
> simple as owning a Wikipedia page about the definition of 'Ontology' that
> raised concerns about resources and commitment. In an area that may need
> standards, best practices, reference implementations, etc. that concern
> doesn't bode well wrt commitments to push the agenda to completion (my
> personal opinion, of course). I'd be quite happy to be proven wrong, and the
> Summits have produced some interesting results, but think for now I'll stick
> with my original recommendation to Cory.
> Still, I think I'd describe the Ontolog Forum more as an instigator than a
> contender:-)
> Cheers,
> David
> -
> Managing Director and Consultant
> TopQuadrant Limited. Registered in England No. 05614307
> UK +44 7788 561308
> US +1 336-283-0606    (06)

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    (07)

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