SUO: Re: The SUMO is a Starter Document
John,
Any starter document has a privileged status over any other document
that isn't a starter document. That's how standards progress. This was
all discussed at length before. I'm still not clear why you feel that
after a vote of approval, it's somehow a priori more virtuous for IFF to
have that privileged status and for SUMO not to. We should be able to
disagree about the technical merits of each others' beliefs without
resorting to an attempt to overturn a clear vote.
Anyway, I'll do my best to avoid further discussion on this topic and
leave the resolution to the various concerned parties.
Adam
At 02:45 PM 6/18/2003 -0500, John F. Sowa wrote:
>Adam,
>
>I believed that motion #1 was subsumed by motion #2, which
>put SUMO and OpenCyc on an equal footing. I repeated that
>point many times.
>
>If I was wrong in that perception, then you should have made
>it clear that motion #1 put SUMO in a more privileged position
>than OpenCyc.
>
>And I was not the only one who failed to see that you intended
>your motion to give SUMO a privileged position. Bob Spillers,
>who has been very attentive to legal points, also failed to
>notice the fine print in your motion. I'm sure that most of
>the people who voted for motion #1 were also unaware of your
>intent.
>
> > Your statement about this being a "misunderstanding" seems
> >disingenuous to me. We agreed to support each other's motions,
> > no more, no less. Now you've reneged on that agreement.
>
>I voted for motion #1. I fulfilled my part of the agreement.
>Now you are claiming that SUMO has a higher status than
>OpenCyc. That was certainly not part of the agreement.
>
> > I'm not sure why you feel it's somehow procedurally virtuous
> > for IFF to be an approved starter document but not for other
> > proposals to be so approved.
>
>I thought that my motion put IFF, SUMO, and OpenCyc on an
>equal footing. But you have taken it upon yourself to tell
>the public that SUMO has a higher status than OpenCyc.
>
>Proposal: If you change the web site to state that there
>are three approved starter documents, IFF, SUMO, and OpenCyc,
>then I will drop the issue.
>
>But I most definitely will not accept any privileged status
>for SUMO ahead of OpenCyc.
>
>John