The seven days we set aside for discussion has come and gone, and 16
or so exchanges were made on the subject matter. It is about time to
bring this to closure. (02)
So far we still have only one (well formed) proposed candidate for our
definition of "Ontology Repository," and that is: (03)
Candidate-(A): "An ontology repository is a facility where
ontologies and related information artifacts can be stored, retrieved
and managed." (04)
I'll wait 3 calendar days for anyone to propose and second other
candidates. Past this time next Monday 2008.02.04, we will put things
to a vote. (05)
I concur with Lee that: (06)
Lee Feigenbaum wrote an 23, 2008 10:08 PM EST
> [LF] there was a consensus understanding in general of the
> distinction between a repository and a registry -- if we agree
> on a definition for a repository (which is our end goal, if I
> understand the project correctly :-), then perhaps we do not
> need to belabor a definition of ontology registry as well (07)
I think the documented discussion during our Jan-23 meeting on what a
"registry" is (ref.
) is enough to allow us to move forward. (08)
Therefore, if you have alternative candidate definitions for "Ontology
Repository", please response to this message and make a motion for its
adoption by this team. Please try to find someone to second your
motion too. (09)
Thanks & regards. =ppy (010)
P.S. Once again, I hope we can just summarily adopt the above
definition (if there are no alternative proposals, and no objections)
and go forward. =ppy
On Jan 23, 2008 12:02 PM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > In particular, were made an attempt (and came close) to adopting
> > a definition for "ontology repository" (possibly even "ontology
> > registry"), but decided to put this up for asynchronous discussion
> > deliberation due to time constraints.
> We were close ... (and have got to):
> "An ontology repository is a facility where ontologies and related
> information artifacts can be stored, retrieved and managed."
> Let's open this up for discussion and then put it to a vote after 7
> calendar days (from the time-stamp of this message).
> Feel free to attempt defining "ontology registry" or "registry" too.
> If we are getting close, we'll adopt that as well.
> Thanks & regards. =ppy
> -- (012)
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
> Date: Jan 23, 2008 11:55 AM
> Subject: Re: [oor-forum] Founding Members Meeting of the Open Ontology
> Repository (OOR) Initiative - Wed 2008.01.23
> To: oor-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> We had a very fruitful meeting today, thanks to all who were able to join us.
> For those who were able to call in, the proceedings are captured at
> the session page at:
> In particular, were made an attempt (and came close) to adopting a
> definition for "ontology repository" (possibly even "ontology
> registry"), but decided to put this up for asynchronous discussion
> deliberation due to time constraints. (I'll start a thread on this in
> a moment.)
> Very encouraging is the fact that the NIST-Ontology-NCOR-...
> co-organized "OntologySummit2008" has adopted "Toward An Open Ontology
> Repository" as the main theme this year. We are looking forward to
> bootstrap from that initiative. Ideas as to how we could do it would
> be welcome.
> Our next call is scheduled for Wed 2008.02.13 - 1.5 Hr. starting at:
> 1pm PST / 4pm EST / 21:00 GMT/UTC.
> Please mark your calendars now and refer to details at the wiki
> session page (closer to the time) at:
> Look forward to having you all at the next meeting.
> Regards. =ppy
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository (014)