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

SUO: Conformance (actually, "standards profiles")




At 09:59 2001-10-21 -0700, Seth Russell wrote:
> ...
> SR: continues ...
> 
> Not at all ... in fact quit the opposite!  What compensates for the forces
> of chaos (to which I believe you refer) is the ability to filter according
> to trust and the ability to employ automated agents upon a larger spectrum
> of possibility.  For example one should be able to filter to only those
> modules (or even individual axioms) for which Pat Hayes, Adam Pease, Chris
> Menzel, and John Sowa are in agreement.  If that is not high enough quality,
> then you could add in a West  a Whitten and a Swartz  ... or if that's too
> tight for your taste you could factor in a Awbrey a Berners-Lee a
> Loughborough a Palmer a Russell or a Suber  .... etc ... i think you might
> get my drift.
> 
> Now that's what I call posh :)

From a standards perspective, there is no problem achieving what you desire.

For example, if "conformance to SUO" (as a registry) means "using at least one item of the SUO registry" (a paraphrase of possible standards wording for conformance), then an implementation claiming conformance to "IEEE 1600.1-2002" would imply that the implementation (e.g., an application) is using at least one item (e.g., axiom) from the SUO registry.

Now if you want refer to a subset (or a superset), you might create a "standards profile".  A "standards profile" is a short document (probably a 1-5 page standard) that describes the requirements of a standard by referencing other standards/specifications (i.e., "normative references"), describing what is included/excluded (e.g., what clauses or which registry items), and describing extensions/restrictions (e.g., "the standard PLUS feature X" or "the standard MINUS feature Y").

So it is possible to create the "HPMS standards profile" (HPMS = Hayes, Pease, Menzel, Sowa) that looks like the text below (a first draft of standards/spec wording).

Standards profiles are used pretty often when referring to a bundle, collection, subset, superset, etc. of standards.

Does this approach address your concern?  Is this "posh" enough for you? :-)

-FF

-----------------------------------------------------------

1 Overview

1.1 Scope

This HPMS Standards Profile references portions of the IEEE 1600.1-2002 Standard Upper Ontology registry.  This Standard Profile does not define these technical features, but normatively references them.

1.2 Purpose

[Reason for creating this standard/spec.  Obviously, not actual wording.  -FF]

This HPMS Standards Profile is based on portions of the SUO registry where Hayes, Pease, Menzel, and Sowa agree.  These folks (after hoisting a few beers) have harmonized their work and seem to get along -- a common, really cool perspective.  It is this common, really cool perspective that is an important foundation to common, really cool applications. [:-)]

2 Normative References

The following normative documents contain provisions which, through reference in this text, constitute provisions of this Standards Profile.  For dated references, subsequent amendments to, or revisions of, any of these publications do not apply.  However, parties to agreements based on this Standards Profile are encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying the most recent editions of the normative documents indicated below.  For undated references, the latest edition of the normative document referred to applies.

        - IEEE 1600.1, Standard Upper Ontology registry.

3 Definitions

3.1 Acronyms and abbreviations

        - SUO: Standard Upper Ontology

4 Conformance

[Note: There are a variety of ways to describe this HPMS subset.  This is just a sample. -FF]

A conforming implementation shall conform to the specifications listed in Clause 2, Normative References, with the following additional provisions:

        - This Standards Profile contains only the SUO registry items where the parties Hayes, Pease, Menzel, and Sowa all "agree".
        - "Agreement" to a SUO registry item is indicated by a party digitally signing a registry item that has an "approved" registration status.

-----------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Frank Farance, Farance Inc.     T: +1 212 486 4700   F: +1 212 759 1605
mailto:frank@farance.com        http://farance.com
Standards, products, services for the Global Information Infrastructure