Re: SUO: Vote on SUMO
Existing ISO standards contain many illustrious examples to work on.
- Z's information hiding and modularity (ISO 13568:2000).
- ISO 15704's application integration framework.
- ISO 19501-1 UML is being refined for real time appplications,
and the 'abstract data type'-assumptions no longer hold in a very
physically-constrained hardware environment. The safety-critical
nature of the applications, say nuclear, mandates rigorous proof
that require translating UML constructs to formal specs and back.
And there are dozens of formal languages to choose from.
- ISO 19107 and 19108 are quite detailed spatial and temporal
schemas used in GIS software. Many other spatial and temporal
modeling approaches are being translated to those.
- other ISO work like content-based indexing is relevant to the
language area of the SUO Project Authorisation. And I feel that's
where the effort is really needed if SUO participants are ever
going to be on the same page - that is , more detailed requirements.
---- Begin Original Message ----
From: "Robert E. Kent" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 09:57:38 -0700
To: "SUO" <email@example.com>
Subject: SUO: Vote on SUMO
I vote NO on SUMO.
It lacks a coherent and principled methodology for combining
continue to advocate a building blocks approach to ontology
would prefer to see the SUMO work refocused towards making explicit
various principles for ontological combination -- perhaps using its
content as an illustrious example.
Robert E. Kent
---- End Original Message ----
Searching for the best free email? Try MetaCrawler Mail, from the #1 metasearch service on the Web, http://www.metacrawler.com