I believe indeed that if we can get a quick agreement on an adjusted
version of the communique, along the lines suggested by Mike and Pat,
then we could use the adjusted version for advertising purposes (I
have the EC in mind). (01)
Nicola (02)
On Mar 16, 2006, at 12:57 PM, Cassidy, Patrick J. wrote: (03)
> I agree that the communiqué as it was adopted does not read like great
> literature. That was at least partly a result of the limited time.
> The original suggestion was divided very roughly into background
> premises and conclusions, but the division was lost in the discussion.
> Perhaps when it is reworked there might be a division along those
> lines?
>
> I think that number 8 might come last, and as Mike suggests more
> discussion of the anticipated benefits might come closely before that
> "decision" point.
>
> Pat
>
>
> Patrick Cassidy
> MITRE Corporation
> 260 Industrial Way
> Eatontown, NJ 07724
> Mail Stop: MNJE
> Phone: 732-578-6340
> Cell: 908-565-4053
> Fax: 732-578-6012
> Email: pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Uschold,
> Michael F
> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 11:06 PM
> To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
> Subject: RE: [uos-convene] The communique: what's next?
>
> The communiqué is fine as a starting point. Some comments and ideas
> for
> improving and evolving it.
>
> * It is difficult to read this and glean the 1-3 really key point. For
> example,
> ----the benefits of a shared UO are not clear,
> ----nor is the emphasis on articulating the similarities and
> differences and inter-relationships.
> It is all there, but not highlighted very well.
>
> * It suffers from the fact that no-one had a chance to look it over in
> the large, we mostly focused on each statement on its own, or in
> context of 1-2 others nearby.
> It has some stylistic problems, easily fixed by some
> word-smithing.
> The order of points is fine in the large, but a clear story
> does not really emerge.
>
> * It comes across a bit like motherhood, which may reflect that fact
> that there was not that much that we could all actually agree on. To
> address this, it may be good to clearly state the very important
> points
> of DIS-agreement, and some pros/cons on the issues.
>
> Mike
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (04)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Nicola Guarino
Co-Editor in Chief, Applied Ontology (IOS Press)
Head, Laboratory for Applied Ontology (LOA), ISTC-CNR
Institute for Cognitive Sciences and Technologies
National Research Council
Via Solteri, 38
I-38100 Trento (05)
phone: +39 0461 828486
secretary: +39 0461 436641
fax: +39 0461 435344
email: guarino@xxxxxxxxxx
web site: http://www.loa-cnr.it (06)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (07)
|