|
In addition, I just heard an early report from Mills Davis on the Semantic Technologies Conference and he said that he could report on the very positive response to our SICoP SWIM - Semantic Wikis presentation by Conor Shankey and that he needs more time to think about how to discuss Dave McCombs presentation since we are dealing with such different perspectives between these two communities, namely Upper Ontology and Semantic Technology and Interoperability. He, like my earlier email below, is completely willing to defer to the Upper Ontology community at this upcoming conference since this is your meeting and we want to learn more about your excellent work over many years and then discuss how we can relate to it in our communities. Brand
-----Brand Niemann/DC/USEPA/US wrote: -----
To: Upper Ontology Summit convention <uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Brand Niemann/DC/USEPA/US
Date: 03/10/2006 08:07AM
cc: Upper Ontology Summit convention <uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Upper Ontology Summit Organizing Committee <uos-org@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, mdavis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [uos-convene] UOS Agenda and Logistical Details
As the organizer and chair of the Application Dialog Session, I have quickly scanned the recent emails and am very pleased that our DRAFT agenda has catalyze your desire to take an active role in its content and so I say to you give me an agenda that you all support, and that is what we will do, and even nominate someone from your group to chair the session if you would like. We who organized this session, without public examples of how upper ontologies had improved semantic interoperability or anyone telling us they would support an upper ontology, turned to those thought leaders in government and non-government organizations and the vendor community using taxonomies/ontologies that might consider using upper ontologies in their projects and products if you made a good case to them at the Summit. So here is you chance, you make that case and we will listen, and respond, as a panel and/or individually, at the Summit or afterwards to what we hear. We would like come to a productive partnership with you since we represent growing communities of practice with semantic technologies (e.g. the Semantic Technology Conference this past week attracted over 600 participants and was organized by Dave McComb). Please respond and organize your own agenda ASAP, if would, like since we are running out of time. Brand
-----uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: -----
To: Upper Ontology Summit convention <uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "John A. Bateman" <bateman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 03/10/2006 05:09AM
cc: Upper Ontology Summit Organizing Committee <uos-org@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [uos-convene] UOS Agenda and Logistical Details
> Do we have any chance to change this around and give Doug, Nicola and
> myself something like an hour each at some point to present our work?
> Shouldn't an upper ontology summit be taken up in majority by the
> upper ontologists?
Ì think Adam's point is quite important for another reason:
much of the work that we do in Bremen on interrelating
ontologies depends crucially on a good understanding
of the 'other' upper ontologies, primarily DOLCE and BFO,
but others too. So it would be very helpful if we can
assume that these ontologies have been presented thoroughly
in the discussion in order to take the next steps. Whether
an hour is necessary I am not sure but longer than 10 minutes!
John B.
_________________________________________________________________
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
|