Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: SUO: Workshop at IJCAI?




Mike,
   I like the latter notion you mention of requiring papers.  I'd further 
like to require that any papers be consistent with any agreements reached 
on the SUO and that they include formal content in SUO-KIF.  This could 
have the effect of ensuring that the papers and discussion would be very 
focused.  Often, workshops spend most of their time agreeing on terminology 
and goals, leaving little time for specific and useful conclusions.  We 
could avoid that completely.

Adam

At 06:07 PM 9/29/2000 -0700, Michael Uschold wrote:
>Adam,
>
>Great job pulling this togetehr so fast. Here are some suggestions for
>[hopefully] improving it.
>
>Open up with a bit more song and dance about the history of ontology workshops
>and confrences.  Say how this one fits into the overall scheme. I think there
>is a nice story to tell.
>
>As far as a potential schedule is concerned,
>
> > 09:00   Introduction and Goals                  Pease
> > 09:30   Summary of formal content submissions   Menzel
> > 10:00   Presentation of Abstracts               All (10 min ea)
> > 12:00   Lunch
> > 01:00   Standards process                       Farance
> > 01:30   SUO content discussion                  All
> > 04:30   SUO - where do we go from here?         All
> > 05:30   Summary, wrapup, action item review     Pease
>
>I like the idea of not having regular papers at all. I think this may be
>a rather different kind of workshop. On the other hand, it would maybe we
>should strongly encourage papers, each addressing a topic that has had major
>discussion on the list. This would be a great motivation for people to take
>charge of an area and summarize it as best as possible.  The more I think 
>about
>it, a one day event might be very much too short. Not sure...  I'm leaning
>towards preferring a Fall Symposium event instead -- but we should still get
>our thoughts together and submit this one if only as a forcing function.
>
>I like the idea of someone taking charge and identifying key topics that have
>been discussed, and they can be the subjects of the discussions.
>
>More thoughts on monday... my brain is fuzzy... I would aim for Friday as a
>target submission date, but email Peter van Beek to tell him you intend to
>submit a bit late.
>
>Mike

-----------------
Adam Pease
Teknowledge
(650) 424-0500 x571