ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] Summit Website

To: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: k Goodier <kgoodier@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 13:57:24 -0400
Message-id: <81BA9A7B-8CD2-458D-A3A2-2210DB6B5248@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Ron -    (01)

When  this  goes off-list, I would appreciate being copied, since IPR and other 
policies ARE my particular ontology interests these days.    (02)

We are developing digital policy ontologies for the government that automate 
and audit  IPR and other policies.     (03)

Thank you for your always kind consideration.  It is greatly appreciated.    (04)

Sincerely,    (05)

Dr. Katherine Goodier    (06)

Kgoodier@xxxxxxxxxxx    (07)

On Apr 21, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:    (08)

> Ron, As I suggested in my last post, let's all take this off-list, and
> let Brand speak for himself. Thank you for your understanding. =ppy
> --
> 
> 
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Ron Wheeler
> <rwheeler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> If I was mislead by previous traffic about government regulation regarding
>> IP, to thinking that it is a government site and if it is not, I apologize.
>> 
>> This actually makes the problem simpler.
>> 
>> Does anyone have an acceptable wording for a statement of attribution?
>> 
>> It would seem that the share-alike provision can also be fixed by adding a
>> statement that regardless of the rights on the rest of the site, the content
>> in question is available under (cc by-sa 3.0).
>> 
>> Does anyone have a wording that would be appropriate.
>> 
>> Does anyone have any other factual issues that need to be addressed?
>> 
>> I think that the timing of publication should be dealt with off-line since
>> that is not fixable by any current repair.
>> 
>> Ron
> 
> 
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> [RW] This whole discussion seems to have degenerated into childishness
>>> and personal feuds that are unbecoming to all involved.
>> 
>> [ppy] I agree with you that this is absurd, not worthy of this forum,
>> and a total disgrace.
>> (I do not agree, though, that there is factual merit on Brand's side,
>> but that is besides the point.)
>> 
>> Also, this is absolutely not driven by "personal feuds."    (09)

_________________________________________________________________
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/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (010)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>