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

SUO: RE: RE: Conformance




Dear Seth,

POSH - Port Out Starboard Home. The luxury way for
English colonialists to travel to/from India on liners
so that their cabin was always on the north (shady)
side of the boat.

Now luxurious, or high quality, or slightly snobbish.

I think high quality will do here.

See below for other comments.


Matthew West
Principal Consultant
Shell Information Technology International Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Other Tel: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.r.west@is.shell.com
Internet: http://www.shell.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Seth Russell [mailto:seth@robustai.net]
> Sent: 18 October 2001 19:21
> To: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org; Frank Farance; West, Matthew R
> SITI-ITPSIE
> Cc: SWAG
> Subject: Re: RE: Conformance
> 
> 
> From: "West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE" <Matthew.R.West@is.shell.com>
> 
> > > I agree with a good number of your points, including your
> > > impression that the SUO work is mostly a "posh dictionary"
> > > (in standards terms: a registry of axioms).
> >
> > MW: If others agree with this too, that would be significant.
> 
> For what it's worth (I'm not a voting member) I agree with 
> this too. Except
> what does 'posh' mean in this context ?
> 
> Modules could be uploaded and registered along with KIF 
> axioms stating their
> dependencies to other modules.  Then we could add some kind of trust
> annotation system for members.  Also automated agents could 
> be employed to
> search for inconsistencies and publish those as well.  Then 
> SUO would become
> more of a continual process, rather than this show stopper kind of
> parliamentary procedure.

MW: Unfortunately the free for all you propose here is exactly what
would militate against a high quality and integrated "dictionary".

MW: On the other hand, I had concluded that the most sensible 
module would be one that had all the axioms relating to one (or
perhaps a few) terms.

> 
> SWAG had similar aspirations (see URL below).  If SUO doesn't 
> want to adopt
> this approach, perhaps we could revitalize SWAG to achieve 
> those same goals.
> 
> http://purl.org/swag/
> Seth Russell
> 
>