ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] A Powerpoint communique?

To: Ontology Summit 2011 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Todd J Schneider <todd.schneider@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 10:37:15 -0400
Message-id: <OF30D143C8.8DF02A53-ON8525785B.00501724-8525785B.005050F6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
John,    (01)

Yes we probably need PowerPoint, but I've always
found it much much more difficult to create PowerPoint
materials that I have some assurance constrain the
possible interpretations and so convey my intent.    (02)

Todd    (03)



From:
"John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date:
03/22/2011 10:00 AM
Subject:
Re: [ontology-summit] A Powerpoint communique?
Sent by:
ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (04)



Mike, Matthew, Jack, and Todd,    (05)

Those are good points:    (06)

MFU
> It occurred to me that our target audience (business people who can make
> decisions) may be more likely to see a Powerpoint pitch than wade
> through 4-6 pages of text.    (07)

Yes, but...    (08)

MW
> It seems to me that the target audience is more those that will have
> to make the case, rather than those that the case is made to.    (09)

I agree.  Decision makers won't attend the Ontology Summit or read
a communique.  Their staff people might.  That's a good reason for
giving them slides that they can show to their boss.    (010)

JR
> Some prospects are left brain dominant and some are right brain 
dominant.
> All like to be in control.  This means that they will respond most
> favorably to a visual with a graphic on one half and 40 words or less
> on the other half and with choices How, When, What, Who, and How Much?
> ... The How Much is Never in Cost units but always in ROI units.    (011)

I agree.    (012)

MFU
> For me, I personally prefer to read a good paper for a topic that
> interests me. Nevertheless,  it takes less than a minute to scan through
> a slide deck and get enough of the gist to decide to read more 
carefully.    (013)

I agree, but I'd emphasize the phrase "good paper".  For most mediocre
papers, I'd rather flip through the slides than wade through the text.    (014)

TS
> Having created the communique, PowerPoint slides could then be created.    (015)

Slides are much easier to create than a well-written communique.    (016)

I seriously doubt that we could write a "good paper" that summarizes
the Ontology Summit.  Trying to coordinate the diverse points of
view and synthesize them into a coherent, smoothly flowing text that
accurately presents all the issues would be extremely difficult.    (017)

Slides would (a) be easier to compile, (b) more accurately portray
the diversity, and (c) contain a URL for each slide that points
to a "good paper" or other presentation for further information.    (018)

John    (019)

_________________________________________________________________
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/OntologySummit2011/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011     (020)

Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (021)



_________________________________________________________________
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/OntologySummit2011/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (022)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>