Ed (and All) ... (01)
> [EB] I have to disagree. ... I disagree. ... (02)
[ppy] ok, that's fair .. .I should have said: (03)
"to eventually produce the *one* owl UoM_ontology_standard at OASIS" (04)
However, getting as much draft as we can, before even moving the
project over to OASIS did occur to me as a goal (before.) (05)
> [EB] ... there will be no English language text until an OWL Working
> Draft is circulated, and the UML diagrams will be maintained to match
> the OWL WD. Any other strategy just results in further re-/retro-fits.
> The CLIF form enhances the OWL model; English and UML document it.
> Or at least, that was my understanding. (06)
[ppy] Agree ... but as (potentially) our general editor, maybe you
can help provide a draft structure (a TOC?) to the QUOMOS English
document, which can guide and integrate the work of the ontology
editors? (07)
Just suggestions ... I shall defer to you on what needs to be done. (08)
Cheers. =ppy
-- (09)
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 9:04 AM, Ed Barkmeyer <edbark@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Peter Yim wrote:
>> The challenge would be for you, Chip and Hans Peter to sync up among
>> yourselves (off-line, as the case may be) and with PatHayes and
>> DavidLeal too, to produce the *one* owl UoM_ontology_standard.
>>
>
> I have to disagree. What Peter describes makes the further
> participation of most of us pointless.
>
> The idea is that the three existing OWL ontologies can be merged with
> respect to common concepts and agree on one term for each of those
> concepts. Where there are differences of opinion as to what the
> conceptual model should be, those should be raised as issues. That
> gives us a baseline. But the "*one* owl UoM_ontology_standard" will be
> developed by the TC/WG from that baseline in an open process.
>
> The idea is that the 3 OWL Champions, having done the work, can
> recognize the differences that are just terminological and the
> differences that are modeling choices, and the differences that are
> conceptual concerns. They can give the group a baseline in which the
> terminological differences and most of the modeling style issues have
> been sorted out, as if they had all been party to one activity in the
> first place. But once we have a Working Draft, it will be up to the TC
> to capture and resolve issues and to appoint an editor to maintain the
> Working Draft.
>
> And OBTW, there will be no English language text until an OWL Working
> Draft is circulated, and the UML diagrams will be maintained to match
> the OWL WD. Any other strategy just results in further re-/retro-fits.
> The CLIF form enhances the OWL model; English and UML document it. Or
> at least, that was my understanding.
>
>> The plan was that we get all the drafting done, before even moving
>> over to OASIS, so that we will onlyt be leveraging the OASIS-SDO
>> setting to make the work into a recognized "standard." ... I guess we
>> are still aiming to do just that.
>>
>
> I disagree. The plan is to have a baseline specification for the
> principal modules when we convene the TC, and to develop it into a
> consensus standard via the OASIS open process. This is not a NASA joint
> project pushing for wider adoption as is. (If we had a document that
> had multiple supporting parties already using it, the process Peter
> describes would be what was wanted, and OMG RFC would probably be a
> better choice. That is the kind of thing the UCUM is doing.)
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
> National Institute of Standards & Technology
> Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
> 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Tel: +1 301-975-3528
> Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 FAX: +1 301-975-4694
>
> "The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
> and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-admin/
> Config/Unsubscribe:
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-admin/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
> Issue Tracking /Doc Repository: http://uom.emcs.cornell.edu/
> Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard
> (010)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-admin/
Config/Unsubscribe:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-admin/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
Issue Tracking /Doc Repository: http://uom.emcs.cornell.edu/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard (011)
|