Thank you all for spending time to discuss this. (01)
Unfortunately, this is not the type of issue we can settle by
voting. ... especially not now, after our solicitation has gone
out and some organizations (like UBL, and even NSF, from Maria's
earlier message which I find to be extremely encouraging) are
still working on getting their 'co-sponsorship' confirmed for us. (02)
As such, I don't think this is a issue we even need to deliberate
here any more. Nor is it productive for this group to be spending
our precious time in lieu of tackling some of the important
issues that we REALLY need consensus on before Mar. 15. (03)
Going back to the very first message, when the co-sponsorship
solicitation came out (and that was my message dated Sun, 26 Feb
2006 12:33:31 -0800 - see:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/2006-02/msg00054.html),
that solicitation went out to 30 or so organizations based on the
definition of: "'Co-sponsors' are organizations who would provide
technical or funding support (which all of you are already
doing), and/or endorsing the purpose of this Upper Ontology
Summit effort. No other 'cost' or requirement are involved ...
other than everyone's good intentions." ... We simply aren't in a
position to retract the solicitation, nor, change the definition
of 'co-sponsor' now. (04)
I believe I can see why Mike Uschold wants the definition
changed, or feel that we are delivering a "wrong" message. He
probably feels that it would be more "fair", if that 'co-sponsor'
label is applied "exclusively" to organizations that are really
making a (technical or financial) contribution to bring the UOS
about. (05)
However, there is a good reason for original choice of the
'co-sponsor' definition (by the organizing committee) -- we
wanted to be "inclusive" and enlist people who are willing to say
they endorse our UOS purpose. Therefore, that was NOT a wrong
message, rather that IS THE MESSAGE we wanted to convey. The UOS
is designed to be BOTH a technical event AND a marketing event
... and they both need to be successful before we can deliver
what we set out to do. I trust we all want to help move upper
ontologies into the main stream ... I think it will be easier if
we are willing to open our doors to more people. (06)
Bottom line ... can I humbly ask everyone to accept that original
definition (my 'latest' proposal is nothing more than a cleaned
up version of that original definition) and move on to address
the more critical issues, please? (07)
Thanks & regards. =ppy
-- (08)
Bill Andersen wrote Fri, 3 Mar 2006 17:49:49 -0500:
> I like (1) (09)
> On Mar 3, 2006, at 18:06 , Obrst, Leo J. wrote:
>
>> Ok, in the interests of brevity and harmony, I advocate the simpler:
>>
>> 1) "'Co-sponsors' are organizations who are providing technical or
>> funding
>> support for the Upper Ontology Summit."
>>
>> If that's too strong, then:
>>
>> 2) "'Co-sponsors' are organizations who are providing technical or
>> funding
>> support."
>>
>> Either of those acceptable to folks?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Leo
>>
>> _____________________________________________
>> Dr. Leo Obrst The MITRE Corporation, Information Semantics
>> lobrst@xxxxxxxxx Center for Innovative Computing & Informatics
>> Voice: 703-983-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S H305
>> Fax: 703-983-1379 McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA (010)
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Obrst, Leo
>> J.
>> Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 5:26 PM
>> To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
>> Subject: RE: [uos-convene] UOS co-sponsorship - NEED ANSWER
>>
>> The rationale for the current wording, from the perspective of the
>> organizers:
>>
>> "'Co-sponsors' are organizations who are providing technical or
>> funding support, and/or endorsing the purpose of this Upper Ontology
>> Summit."
>>
>> is that some organizations may be providing directly neither technical
>> nor funding support, but which still endorse the purpose of this Upper
>> Ontology Summit. NCOR, possibly, for example. The W3C, perhaps, none of
>> whose members may physically show up. There may be others. The actual
>> wording we agreed on was to eliminate the unnecessary "and/or", since
>> "or" is not exclusive:
>>
>> "'Co-sponsors' are organizations who are providing technical or
>> funding support, or endorsing the purpose of this Upper Ontology
>> Summit."
>>
>> I would rephrase this more clearly as:
>> "'Co-sponsors' are organizations who are providing technical or
>> funding support or who endorse the purpose of this Upper Ontology
>> Summit."
>>
>> I think this lets everyone on or off the hook, no?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Leo
>>
>> _____________________________________________
>> Dr. Leo Obrst The MITRE Corporation, Information Semantics
>> lobrst@xxxxxxxxx Center for Innovative Computing & Informatics
>> Voice: 703-983-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S H305
>> Fax: 703-983-1379 McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bill
>> Andersen
>> Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 4:47 PM
>> To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
>> Subject: Re: [uos-convene] UOS co-sponsorship - NEED ANSWER
>>
>>
>> On Mar 3, 2006, at 16:45 , Uschold, Michael F wrote:
>>
>>> Argggh. The trouble with this is I cannot easily have Boeing formally
>>> endorse anything. I can say that Boeing gave technical support,
>>> because
>>> they sent me. Hence, my suggestion of a very simple statement:
>>>
>>> 'Co-sponsors' are organizations who are providing technical or
>> funding
>>> support,
>>
>> Seconded. While I don't have to worry about a big company's rules,
>> I'd like to reserve Ontology Works' support of the outcome until I
>> see what that outcome is.
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
>> To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
>> Shared Files:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
>> Community Wiki:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
>> To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
>> Shared Files:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
>> Community Wiki:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
>> To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
>> Shared Files:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
>> Community Wiki:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit
>>
>
> Bill Andersen (andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
> Chief Scientist
> Ontology Works, Inc. (www.ontologyworks.com)
> 3600 O'Donnell Street, Suite 600
> Baltimore, MD 21224
> Office: 410-675-1201
> Cell: 443-858-6444
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
> To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
> Shared Files:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit
>
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit (011)
|