An open letter to the UOS organizers and all key participants.
Please read the whole thing. (01)
.bill (02)
On Mar 9, 2006, at 19:24 , Adam Pease wrote: (03)
> Peter,
> That's good to hear. My suggestion, with all respect to Mills,
> would be to have Doug, Nicola and myself each present our views for
> 1/2 hour each from 9am to 10:30am. That's still quite limited, but
> might give the group at least some of the groundwork needed to make
> progress on an upper ontology summit. (04)
Let me amplify Adam's comments: (05)
For this proceeding to be taken seriously, there needs to be a clear
focus, clear goals, and ample time given to discuss some very
difficult topics. All three are lacking from the proposed agenda. I
completely agree with Adam on his earlier points about lack of proper
focus. Now, let me move on to another topic. Upon reading Adam's
post I decided to look at the agenda myself: (06)
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit/
UosApplicationDialogMeeting_2006_03_15 (07)
I discovered that Wednesday morning's agenda is a platform for
commercial vendors of "ontology" tools to talk about and demonstrate
their products and/or positions. This is a completely inappropriate
activity to be mixed in with a scientific discussion of upper
ontology and an attempt at reconciliation of UOs as engineering
efforts. I had absolutely no idea such an activity was planned. Had
I known I would have protested. Who is the audience for this? Why
where these particular parties selected? Who selected them? Is the
press invited? What statements have been prepared to give to the
press regarding these commercial interests? (08)
We all deserve answers to these questions. (09)
I have given freely of my valuable time to help shape the wording and
agenda for the summit. I work very hard to keep my life as an
academic researcher in this area separate from my interest in my
company. Now I find out that my efforts and name and reputation and
even that of my company are being used in part to foster the
commercial interests of those in competition with us? This is an
absolutely unheard of outrage!!!!! (010)
I can't speak for Adam or for Doug Lenat, but If you're going to have
demos, then why not include demos of Ontology Works IODE, Cyc, and
Sigma – the most mature products in existence that have REAL upper
ontologies in them. Either open it up to anyone with an actual ULO-
based product, or kill the commercial content altogether. I suggest
killing the commercial content so we can stick to the science and
engineering. So... (011)
Can any of you explain any of this??? (012)
If not, then I will formally (and *very* publicly) withdraw my
personal support and that of my company for the UOS effort.
Moreover, I will in the strongest possible terms urge my commercial,
academic, and government colleagues to do the same. (013)
.bill (014)
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 (015)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (016)
|