SUO: Re: SUO Ballot with 2 Questions
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
Matthew,
I have voted NO the first question and YES on the second question,
but I am still open to having my mind changed on the first issue.
My concerns with the first proposal are these:
1. I am suspicious of bureaucratic procedures that achieve an illusion of
consensus about a given issue or a pretence of credibility for a given
document, when no such consensus or credibility really exists. We have
had our fill of such procedures already, and so I am naturally somewhat
wary of seeing anymore of this kind of sleight-of-hand.
2. From my perspective, there is already a method for converging on
a state of congruence with both our society and our reality, and
that is known as the method of scientific inquiry, as exemplified
by all of the ways that problems are actually solved and phenomena
are really explained in the research endeavors of all our various
communities of inquiry. So I am reluctant to settle for anything
that is proposed to serve as a second-rate substitute for that.
3. Furthermore, I do not how any such work programme can be rendered
enforceable among people who do not already see the need of it,
except by means of coercion of various sorts, the main problem
here being that, once the power of coercion toward assent is
instituted, it almost always ends up being abused in ways
that corrupt the good ends intended.
So let me know how you see these issues,
and how you expect that they might be
dealt with in the implementation.
Jon Awbrey
jim.s3@juno.com wrote:
>
> ATTN Voting Members of IEEE P1600.1 Standard Upper Ontology Working Group:
>
> 1. Please acknowledge receipt of this ballot by Sept 26, 2003.
> But if you vote by that date, there is no need to also acknowledge.
>
> 2. Please cast 2 votes on the below two ballot questions.
>
> 3. Votes may be in the form of YES, NO, or ABSTAIN. Each questions 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]).
>
> 4. The period for voting will end at midnight EDT on Oct 11, 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 me, not the SUO list, unless you
> specifically want your vote (and any comments) shared with everyone.
> With 82 voting members, this would be too much list traffic.
>
> 6. Comments and discussions on the merits of these motions are permitted
> during the voting period, but the wording will not be changed.
>
> Jim Schoening
> Chair, IEEE P1600.1 Standard Upper Ontology Working Group
> Jim.S3@juno.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Title: Proposal to Develop a Standardisation Methodology and a
> 4 Dimensional Ontology to be included as Components within
> the Information Flow Framework.
>
> (Note 1 ballot, 2 votes)
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Ballot Question #1: NO
>
> The Standard Upper Ontology group approves the objective
> and work programme set out below and encourages its
> members to participate in the programme, developing
> and reviewing the programme deliverables.
>
> Objective
>
> To develop a methodology for the development of standards
> deliverables within the Standard Upper Ontology Workgroup.
>
> Work Programme
>
> 1. Establish a methodology for developing and improving
> SUO standards deliverables including establishing levels
> of deliverable, approvals required to achieve a level,
> and an issue raising and resolution process. Initial
> material to indicate the intent is attached.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Ballot Question #2: YES
>
> The Standard Upper Ontology group approves the objective
> and work programme set out below and encourages its
> members to participate in the programme, developing
> and reviewing the programme deliverables.
>
> Objective
>
> To develop a 4 dimensional ontology and include it as
> a component within the Information Flow Framework.
>
> Work Programme
>
> 1. Develop an ontology based on the 4-dimensional
> paradigm. Initial material to act as a start point
> is contained in ISO/FDIS 15926-2.
>
> http://www.tc184-sc4.org/wg3ndocs/wg3n1328/lifecycle_integration_schema.html
>
> The approach will be to develop the ontology as
> reusable components, where appropriate.
>
> 2. Make the 4-Dimensional Ontology available as components
> within the Information Flow Framework and develop
> mappings to other ontologies within the framework.
>
> ========End===================
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o