RE: SUO: Latest Draft Ballot Questions
Dear John,
These latest revisions or the version last week would be
fine with me. Remember my comments about this really
being a political rather than technical motion. I'm only
anxious to avoid shooting ourselves in the foot.
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: sowa [mailto:sowa@bestweb.net]
> Sent: 24 May 2003 04:26
> To: Patrick Cassidy; jim.s3@juno.com
> Cc: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
> Subject: Re: SUO: Latest Draft Ballot Questions
>
>
>
> Pat, Matthew, Frank, Jim, et al.,
>
> I think that we should leave the detailed wordsmithing
> to the standard-writing process. If it is OK with you,
> I would be just as happy to go with last week's version.
> But if you would prefer, I'll make one more pass at
> another version (see below).
>
> 1. To make it clear, I put the word "specification"
> ahead of "registration".
>
> 2. To avoid making a commitment to IS 11179-3, I said
> "such as" instead of "according to".
>
> 3. I shortened and simplified some of the other wording.
>
> If this doesn't make everybody happy, I suggest that
> Jim should go with the earlier version for the ballot.
>
> John Sowa
> ______________________________________________________________
>
>
> Should the IEEE P1600.1 Standard Upper Ontology Working Group
> (SUO) commence work on a project to develop a standard for
> ontology specification and registration, according to the
> following guidelines:
>
> 1. The standard shall be based on the contributions of three
> SUO candidate projects: IFF, OpenCyc, and SUMO.
>
> 2. The standard shall specify an ontology registry, such as
> the metadata registries specified by ISO/IEC IS 11179-3,
> but with extensions that are required to define ontologies
> and to relate them to one another.
>
> 3. The ontology registry shall be organized as a collection
> of modules, related in a generalization/specialization
> hierarchy.
>
> 4. Each module shall consist of a theory together with
> documentation and other metadata. The theory shall consist
> of axioms and definitions stated in a logic-based language,
> such as those in the Common Logic (CL) framework.
>
> 5. The standard shall include the specification of a methodology
> for testing the theory part of any module for consistency,
> relating theories to one another in the generalization/
> specialization hierarchy, and combining two or more theories
> to derive a new theory that is larger and more specialized
> than the theories from which it was derived.
>
>
>