Denise and Duane, (01)
I appreciate your new input. (02)
Since we have moved beyond the debate/discussion window[1], and your
proposals are clear enough to not require much further discourse, may
I suggest you each make a formal motion, and get a second to your
proposed definition, and we move forward from there (and have people
vote on them.) (03)
[1] ref.
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/2008-01/msg00018.html#nid05
&
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/2008-02/msg00000.html#nid02 (04)
Thanks & regards. =ppy
-- (05)
On Feb 4, 2008 8:16 AM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> All,
>
>
> Since we have not received alternate candidates, there is only one
> candidate definition put forth, by the attendees of the 23-Jan-2008
> OOR Founding Members meeting, for "Ontology Repository," which reads:
>
> "An ontology repository is a facility where ontologies and related
> information artifacts can be stored, retrieved and managed."
>
> We will open this up for voting (please do so by responding to this
> thread) in the next 48 hours (two working-days.)
>
> Let us try to get general consent and summarily adopt this if we can:
> ... If we do not receive two (2) or more objections to adopting the
> above, we will summarily adopt this definition for the
> OpenOntologyRepository (OOR) initiative. If there are two (2) or more
> people objecting to the adoption, we will put it to a vote, and
> require a two-third majority (given it's importance) to adopt this
> definition.
>
> (While declaring positive support is always welcomed, if you are not
> raising an "objection" you do not necessarily have to cast your vote
> of support at this point.)
>
>
> Thanks & regards. =ppy
>
> P.S. since we are doing this for the first time here, any
> comments/suggestions on the process is also welcomed. I am just going
> by what we usually do at ONTOLOG. =ppy
> -- (06)
> On Feb 4, 2008 7:29 AM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Thank you, ...[snip]...
> >
> > Focusing on the subject matter (i.e. trying to get a (set of) definition
>adopted), do we have:
> >
> > (a) alternate candidate definition(s) that anyone else want to put forth
>for "Ontology Repository" ?
> >
> > (b) any other definitions one may want to propose for adoption together
>with "Ontology Repository" (maybe "OntologyRegistry" ?) as a set?
> >
> > Please bring it up now (and quickly, along with someone to second the
>motion). We will be putting the whole subject matter to a vote in 20 minutes.
> >
> > Thanks & regards. =ppy
> > -- (07)
> > On Feb 4, 2008 1:43 AM, Dennis Nicholson <d.m.nicholson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> ...[snip]...
> > >
> > > I'm sending this to you for information ...[snip]...
> > > ---------------------------------------------
> > > Dennis Nicholson (08)
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Peter Yim
> > > Sent: 01 February 2008 15:48
> > > To: OpenOntologyRepository-discussion
> > > Subject: Re: [oor-forum] Defining "Ontology Repository" (maybe
> > > "OntologyRegistry" too) for the OOR Initiative
> > >
> > > Folks,
> > >
> > > 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.
> > >
> > > So far we still have only one (well formed) proposed candidate for our
> > > definition of "Ontology Repository," and that is:
> > >
> > > Candidate-(A): "An ontology repository is a facility where
> > > ontologies and related information artifacts can be stored, retrieved and
> > > managed."
> > >
> > > 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.
> > >
> > > I concur with Lee that:
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> > > I think the documented discussion during our Jan-23 meeting on what a
> > > "registry" is (ref.
> > >
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OOR/ConferenceCall_2008_01_23#nid17U
> > > R
> > > ) is enough to allow us to move forward.
> > >
> > > 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.
> > >
> > > Thanks & regards. =ppy
> > >
> > > 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
> > > -- (09)
> > > 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.
> > > >
> > > > Ref.
> > > > http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OOR/ConferenceCall_2008_01_23#
> > > > nid17US
> > > >
> > > > 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
> > > > -- (010)
> > > > ---------- 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:
> > > > http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OOR/ConferenceCall_2008_01_23
> > > >
> > > > 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:
> > > > http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OOR/ConferenceCall_2008_02_13
> > > >
> > > > Look forward to having you all at the next meeting.
> > > >
> > > > Regards. =ppy
> > > > -- (011)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/
Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository (012)
|