Fw: SUO: Both Motions Pass
All,
Julian Fowler asked: "Since there is continuing discussion of the
status of the SUMO within the SUO activity I request a clarification of
this from the chair."
The original determination, as posted below, stands.
Jim
--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: jim.s3@juno.com
To: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
Cc: jawbrey@oakland.edu
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 16:39:36 -0400
Subject: SUO: Both Motions Pass
Message-ID: <20030614.163937.-606831.0.jim.s3@juno.com>
Reply-To: jim.s3@juno.com
Received: from mx16.nyc.untd.com (mx16.nyc.untd.com [10.140.24.76])
by maildeliver26.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AAA9QZFN3AU67QRJ
for <jim.s3@juno.com> (sender
<owner-standard-upper-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org>);
Sat, 14 Jun 2003 14:37:29 -0700 (PST)
Received: from majordomo2.ieee.org (majordomo2.ieee.org [140.98.193.24])
by mx16.nyc.untd.com with SMTP id AAA9QZFN2ATKDECJ
for <jim.s3@juno.com> (sender
<owner-standard-upper-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org>);
Sat, 14 Jun 2003 17:37:28 -0400 (EST)
Received: from majordomo2.ieee.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by majordomo2.ieee.org (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id
h5EKf4wx027100
for <standard-upper-ontology-resent@majordomo2.ieee.org>; Sat, 14
Jun 2003 16:41:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by majordomo2.ieee.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h5EKf4gQ027099
for standard-upper-ontology-resent; Sat, 14 Jun 2003 16:41:04
-0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=--__JNP_000_0a0d.3491.5572
Precedence: bulk
X-Moderator-Address: standard-upper-ontology-approval@majordomo.ieee.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.3 required=5.0
tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_JUNO_RCVD,NO_REAL_NAME
version=2.55-ieee_anti_spam
X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to majordomo@majordomo.ieee.org
Sender: owner-standard-upper-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org
Return-Path: <owner-standard-upper-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55-ieee_anti_spam
(1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp)
X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients
<standard-upper-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org>
X-Listname: standard-upper-ontology
Message-ID: <20030614.163937.-606831.0.jim.s3@juno.com>
SUO Members and Participants,
Both motions pass, per the following formula and numbers, and
attached spreadsheet. Please send any corrections.
#1: 31(YES) > 16(NO) + 6(ABSTAIN)
#2: 46(YES) > 5(NO) + 2(ABSTAIN)
Congratulations to all who have been working to advance these
documents. We need to now discuss how to advance them further.
Our thanks should also go to Jon Awbrey who has been working hard
to update the contact information on our growing number of members, plus
his tabulation of this ballot.
Jim Schoening
-------------------------------------------
Jim,
Here is the final spreadsheet,
with Valente substracted and
the other two added.
I count:
Eligible Voters: 79
Acknowledgements: 71
Ballots Cast: 53
Question 1, Abstain: 6
Question 1, No: 16
Question 1, Yes: 31
Question 2, Abstain: 2
Question 2, No: 5
Question 2, Yes: 46
Jon Awbrey
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
===========Copy of Ballot=====================
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_register.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!