All, (01)
As mentioned previously, I was hoping we could summarily adopt the
motion that has been outstanding so we could move ahead with the
initiative and do something concrete. (02)
I am equally as happy that there are some last minute input, but hope
we can wrap this up soon enough, to be fair to those who had actually
spend time at the meeting to discuss the subject matter, and voiced
their opinion within the time set aside for discussion. (03)
Unless there are objections, let us try to close this (the discussion
and possible new motions) and line up all the motion(s) (included
seconded ones) for a vote by 8:16am PST / 11:16am EST / 16:16 UTC
tomorrow 2008.02.05 (i.e. 1-day after we originally meant to start
voting.) (04)
Thanks & regards. =ppy (05)
P.S. by the way, there is still only one motion out there, stiil. =ppy
-- (06)
On Feb 4, 2008 9:06 AM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Denise and Duane,
>
> I appreciate your new input.
>
> 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.)
>
> [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
>
> Thanks & regards. =ppy
> --
>
>
>
> 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
> > --
>
>
> > 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
> > > --
>
>
> > > 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
>
>
> > > > -----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
> > > > --
>
>
> > > > 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
> > > > > --
>
>
> > > > > ---------- 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
> > > > > --
> (07)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (08)
|