ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] Distributed Governance model

To: Ontology Summit 2008 <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ontology Summit 2008 <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Barry Smith <phismith@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:10:58 -0400
Message-id: <20080321201610.GLJW21903.mta15.adelphia.net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I personally would be very interested in seeing what the Wikipedia 
review policies are.
There is now also http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/, founded by some of 
the founders of Wikipedia, but with enhanced attention to good 
reviewing policies/boards.
BS    (01)

At 03:52 PM 3/21/2008, Farrukh Najmi wrote:
>Fabian Neuhaus wrote:
> > Bill,
> >
> >> - I would not expect the "gatekeeper" to exclude any particular
> >> ontology from an "open" repository.
> >>
> > There seems to be a misunderstanding. Gatekeeping -- at least in the
> > context of this thread -- is exactly about the minimal criteria that any
> > ontology needs to meet in order to be accepted as part of the repository.
> >
> >
>
>+1 on the importance of gatekeeping using a minimal set of criteria.
>
>What follows are some thoughts that have been percolating in my head as
>I listen to all the good ideas in recent threads.
>
>Since the scope of the OOR is quite broad and covers both upper and
>domain ontologies we should architect the OOR to support
>a distributed and federated governance model. To me this implies the
>following:
>
>     * There will not be a single governance body and set of governance
>       policies acting as a gatekeeper on all nodes of a federated OOR
>     * Each OOR sub-community would be responsible for administering its
>       own OOR node and enforcing theor own governance policies
>     * The governance policies of the root OOR may impact the policies of
>       sub-OOR and serve as a reference model for them
>           o In many cases sub-OOR may simply adopt some, most or all the
>             governance policies of the root OOR. That would be their
>             decision.
>     * We need to primarily focus on the governance aspects of the root
>       OOR and start capturing it in a new wiki page(s). I expect such
>       page(s) to define:
>           o The organizational policies (ala by-laws) of the OOR
>           o Key operational business processes and the workflow between them
>           o The technical policies (e.g. role-based access control
>             policies etc.)
>     * Operational business policies would include a review board and
>       approval process for approving new submissions to the OOR
>     * Wikipedia has a similar problem of distributed authoring, review
>       and approval. Perhaps we should investigate how wikipedia's review
>       and approval process work and perhaps adopt them as a starting point
>
>What do folks think?
>
>--
>Regards,
>Farrukh Najmi
>
>Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
>Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
>Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2008/
>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2008
>Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/    (02)



_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/ 
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2008/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2008 
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/    (03)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>