RE: SUO: Ballot may be released Friday
Dear Pierre,
The rules are that anyone can propose any motion they like. Jim must present
such motions for vote. There has been encouragement to merge the motions, but
it is Adam's final and absolute right to make a motion that is just what he
wants it to be.
The motions whether they pass or fail will neither prevent or force people
to do anything. They would mark a level of consensus (if they pass) and that
would be quite an achievement in itself. As I said before, it is politics
(nothing wrong with that). Just don't confuse it for something else. There
is certainly no requirement to be logical or canonical.
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: Pierre Grenon [mailto:pierre.grenon@ifomis.uni-leipzig.de]
> Sent: 29 May 2003 12:27
> To: jim.s3@juno.com
> Cc: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org;
> pierre.grenon@ifomis.uni-leipzig.de
> Subject: Re: SUO: Ballot may be released Friday
>
>
>
> Jim,
>
> Thanks for your reply, in a sense I'm glad there is nothing
> much more to the
> story than what I could follow. But you've just stated what
> is a problem imho.
> Why do you as a chair run these motions together? How will we
> proceed from
> there? Suppose both pass, we will be able to work on SUMO
> stand-alone. We will
> be able to work on IFF-SUMO-OpenCyc. That's it. How will the
> work on SUMO
> differ from other work? There is an air of absurdity in
> what's going on here,
> unless Matthew is right - this is politics and we don't
> really care about what
> we are voting on provided we all experience this great
> feeling of communion -
> and this working group has succeeded in institutionalizing the kind of
> silliness it has been crippled with in the past.
>
> best,
> pierre
>
> > Pierre,
> >
> > The motions overlap.
> >
> > John's motion includes the introduction OpenCyc and SUMO as
> > documents to be worked on by this group. John DeOliveiri felt John
> > Sowa's motion adequately introducted OpenCyc into the group
> and withdrew
> > his motion. But Adam wanted a separate motion for SUMO.
> >
> > Jim Schoening
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 29 May 2003 09:58:57 +0100 "Pierre Grenon"
> > <pierre.grenon@ifomis.uni-leipzig.de> writes:
> > > Sorry to be stubbornly logical (as Matthew puts it). Can anybody
> > > please explain
> > > to me or send a pointer to a message on this list expalining how
> > > these two
> > > motions relate and what will happen in case both are adopted?
> > > I still do not see the point of voting on commencing work on one
> > > document and
> > > voting on commencing work on any document. What does 'candidate
> > > project' means
> > > in John's motion? So far only IFF has a status here. If Adams'
> > > motion passes,
> > > IFF and SUMO will have a status, not OpenCyc. Why does
> John's motion
> > > mention
> > > OpenCyc then?
> > >
> > > My comment is:
> > > i) Adams' motion is fine.
> > > ii) John's should not be specific (not name anything, but
> IFF since
> > > it's
> > > already accepted), propose a provision for including more
> sources.
> > > Additional
> > > sources should be proposed and eventually accepted the way SUMO
> > > might be.
> > >
> > > Thanks for your time,
> > > Pierre
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > SUO Working Group,
> > > >
> > > > 1. This is not yet the actual ballot, so please don't vote yet.
> > > >
> > > > 2. Below are the latest versions of the motions by Adam
> Pease and
> > > John
> > > > Sowa.
> > > >
> > > > 3. If see any errors or have additional suggested changes that
> > > will
> > > > impact your vote,
> > > > please submit them to the list or to Adam or John.
> > > >
> > > > 4. The ballots will be posted to this list and also mailed
> > > directly to
> > > > all voting members. You will be asked to respond to both Jon
> > > Awbrey and
> > > > me, but not the SUO list, unless you specifically want
> your vote
> > > (and any
> > > > comments) shared with everyone. Keep in mind, with 79 voting
> > > members, we
> > > > don't want to swamp people's inboxes.
> > > >
> > > > 5. If no further changes, the ballot will be released
> Friday, May
> > > 30th,
> > > > and be open for 14 days.
> > > >
> > > > Jim Schoening
> > > >
> > > > ----------Final Draft Ballot--------------------------------
> > > > Subject: SUO Ballot with 2 Questions
> > > >
> > > > ATTN Voting Members of IEEE P1600.1 Standard Upper Ontology
> > > Working
> > > > Group:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Please vote on the below two questions. Votes may be in the
> > > form of
> > > > YES, NO, or ABSTAIN. The motion will pass if both (a
> majority of
> > > voting
> > > > members either vote or acknowledge receipt of the
> ballot) and (YES
> > > votes
> > > > are greater than [NO plus ABSTAIN votes]).
> > > >
> > > > 2. If you are unsure whether you are a voting member,
> see the list
> > > of
> > > > voting members at http://suo.ieee.org/voting-members.txt.
> > > >
> > > > 3. If you choose not to vote, please acknowledge receipt of the
> > > ballot.
> > > >
> > > > 4. The period for voting will end at midnight EDT on June 13,
> > > 2003. If a
> > > > majority of voting members have not yet voted or
> acknowledged, the
> > > chair
> > > > may extend the period for voting and may remind those who have
> > > not
> > > > responded.
> > > >
> > > > 5. Please email your vote to Jon Awbrey (copied above)
> and me, but
> > > not
> > > > the SUO list, unless you specifically want your vote (and any
> > > comments)
> > > > shared with everyone.
> > > >
> > > > Jim Schoening
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Ballot Question #1:
> > > >
> > > > "Should the IEEE P1600.1 Standard Upper Ontology Working
> > > Group
> > > > commence work on the Suggested Upper Merged Ontology (SUMO)
> > > version 1.52
> > > > [April 25, 2003] posted at:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> <http://ontology.teknowledge.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~
> /SUO/Merge.
> > > > txt?rev=1.49&content-type=text/plain> (containing the
> ontology)
> > > and
> > > > http://ontology.teknowledge.com:8080/rsigma/FormalSUOdraft.rtf>
> > > > (containing the text of the formal standards proposal) with the
> > > intent of
> > > > developing it into a final SUO document. There is
> further intent
> > > to
> > > > collaborate with the SUO group working on a joint library of
> > > modules
> > > > project.
> > > >
> > > > Background: Information which is not part of the motion or
> > > proposed
> > > > starter document, but which may be helpful in appreciating its
> > > value, is
> > > > as follows. The SUMO was first released on Dec 9, 2000.
> The first
> > > and
> > > > all subsequent revisions have been public releases.
> SUMO is being
> > > used
> > > > by (a small number) of companies and research
> institutions around
> > > the
> > > > world. It has been subject to formal verification by an
> > > automated
> > > > theorem prover. It has been divided into 11 modules to
> simplify
> > > reuse.
> > > > SUMO is small enough to be easily learned (approximately 1000
> > > terms, 4000
> > > > axioms, 750 rules) but large enough to cover, at a high
> level, any
> > > domain
> > > > of interest. It is well-axiomatized, including many rules, not
> > > just a
> > > > type structure. The language it is written in is defined at
> > > > <http://suo.ieee.org/suo-kif.html>. SUMO has been written
> > > independently
> > > > of any particular theorem prover and has been used in several
> > > different
> > > > systems including LOOM and SNARK. SUMO has also been
> used in the
> > > > creation of a number of other freely available
> products, as listed
> > > below
> > > >
> > > > - WordNet Mappings: We've now mapped, by hand, all of the
> > > > approximately 100,000 WordNet synsets to SUMO concepts. In
> > > addition to
> > > > the nouns, we've mapped the verbs, adjectives, and adverbs.
> > > > <http://ontology.teknowledge.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/SUO/>
> > > >
> > > > - SUMO-Compliant Domain Ontologies. These include
> ontologies
> > > for
> > > > weapons of mass destruction and terrorism, Quality of Service
> > > ontology,
> > > > covering computer systems and networks, Ecommerce Services
> > > ontology,
> > > > Ontology of biological viruses, Financial ontology, Ontology of
> > > terrain
> > > > features, an ontology of Government, and a Periodic table of the
> > > > elements.
> > > >
> <http://ontology.teknowledge.com:8080/rsigma/index.html#download>
> > > >
> > > > - LOOM Translator for SUMO
> > > >
> > >
> >
> <http://einstein.teknowledge.com:8080/Sumo2Loom/Sumo2Loom_regi
> ster.jsp?fi
> > > > leType=.tar&fileName=sumo2loom_b7.tar>
> > > >
> > > > - DAML translation of SUMO
> > > > <http://reliant.teknowledge.com/DAML/SUMO.daml>
> > > >
> > > > - XML translation of SUMO
> > > > <http://ontology.teknowledge.com:8080/rsigma/Merge-XML.txt> and
> > > KIF to
> > > > XML translator
> > > <http://ontology.teknowledge.com:8080/rsigma/KIF2XML.txt>
> > > >
> > > > - open source browser download for SUMO
> > > > <http://virtual.cvut.cz/kifb/en/>
> > > >
> > > > - on-line SUMO browser
> > > >
> > >
> <http://ontology.teknowledge.com:8080/rsigma/SKB.jsp?req=SC&skb=SUMO>
> > > >
> > > > All of these items are freely available through our
> Ontology home
> > > page:
> > > > <http://ontology.teknowledge.com> or directly at the
> links above.
> > > >
> > > > Please insert vote here (YES, NO, or ABSTAIN): ( )
> > > >
> > > > --------End Ballot Question #1----------------------------------
> > > >
> > >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ballot Question #2:
> > > >
> > > > 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.
> > > >
> > > > Please insert vote here (YES, NO, or ABSTAIN): ( )
> > > >
> > > > --------End Ballot Question #2----------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________________________________________
> > > > The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
> > > > Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
> > > > Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
> > > >
> > > --
> > > Pierre Grenon
> > > IFOMIS Uni Leipzig
> > > Haertelstr. 16-18
> > > 04107 Leipzig
> > > http://people.ifomis.uni-leipzig.de/pierre.grenon/
> > > pgrenon@ifomis.uni-leipzig.de
> > > phone: 49(0)351971672
> > > fax: 49(0)3519716179
> > > H"
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
> > Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
> > Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
> >
>