SUO: Re: Industry takeover
Adam,
Nobody was criticizing the charter.
> All we have to do is propose something that meets
> the charter, not justify the charter itself at
> this point.
I was simply observing that you were requiring more
proof and justification for IFF, which has already
been approved as a candidate project, than you were
requiring for SUMO. I believe that all three projects,
IFF, SUMO, and OpenCyc are worthy candidates. Since
IFF has already been approved, no further justification
should be necessary.
Your next paragraph makes a good point:
> You'd like SUMO to collaborate in some way with IFF.
> That's fine. But even putting aside for the moment
> whether I think that's a good idea, you've got to
> provide some concrete example of what you want us to do.
> I really have no idea concretely how to begin to do what
> you ask. Could you do the first day of work on what
> you'd like to see us do so we'd have a model to follow?
That is a fair question.
Tomorrow, I'll send a suggested outline of how developers
from the three efforts could collaborate, but I would also
like to ask Robert and the other IFF developers to comment
on this point.
John