SUO: RE: Latest Draft Ballot Questions
Dear Frank,
I would agree that ISO11179 is worth looking at as at least a
start point. I just think we need more investigation of our
requirements in this area before we commit.
This is probably an area where I can contribute as things
develop.
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.west@shell.com
Internet: http://www.shell.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Farance [mailto:frank@farance.com]
> Sent: 24 May 2003 01:22
> To: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
> Subject: SUO: Latest Draft Ballot Questions
>
>
>
> At 22:15 2003-05-23 +0100, West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE wrote:
> >
> > Dear John,
> >
> > I recommend not specifying ISO 11179. You might end up
> deciding to use
> > it, but having taken a look, I consider it inappropriate unless you
> > are only concerned with data models.
>
> I agree that it doesn't make sense to reference ISO/IEC
> 11179-3 now -- that's an implementation approach towards the
> development of the standard. Certainly, later on we can
> decide how to handle the registry aspect.
>
> I think I've made this point more than once, but ISO/IEC
> 11179 isn't just for data models (nor is UML just for data
> models). There are many other applications of 11179. For
> example, in one application, we use 11179-3 for multilingual
> terminology management.
>
> Based on everything said so far, ISO/IEC 11179-3 sounds
> pretty useful -- probably at least a 90% job on what we need.
> I don't know about the other 10% because (still) I haven't
> seen good working definitions for "ontology". :-)
>
> > There are several alternative metadata standards that can
> be considered,
> > perhaps the best known is the Dublin Core.
>
> The Dublin Core standard (now an ISO standard) is unlikely to
> be particularly useful -- using the approach above, I'd
> describe it as a 5% solution because we'd have to create
> everything ourselves to lay upon DC. Not all metadata is the
> same. (Of course, you knew that.)
>
> -FF
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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 Information/Communication Technologies
>
>