RE: SUO: a silly question about the new modular architecture
John,
I don't think this is a silly question. I'm inclined to think that
there will be a big ripple effect which will mean we'll have two
ontologies. The more divisions we have, the less of a standard we
have. As you might guess, I'd rather that we find one reasonable compromise.
Adam
At 01:37 PM 9/6/2001 -0700, Thompson, John A wrote:
>Forgive me if this silly question has been asked before.
>
>Is the theory that one could pick either the 3d or 4d spatio-temporal
>module and then use the rest of the ontology modules as is (they will work
>equally well with either the 3d or 4d module), or would all the other
>modules in the system have to be encoded twice -- one version to work with
>the 3d module, and another version to work with the 4d module?
>
>Thanks,
>John Thompson
>Boeing
Adam Pease
Teknowledge
(650) 424-0500 x571