SUO: Re: Program wants to work with SUO documents
To Jim Schoening:
Your proposal seems to be devoid of rational sense. Any advanced and
large-scale technological project having an open public status, like the
IEEE SUO, shouldn't have to do anything with the US Army military programs,
as well as its chair.
Director and Chief Scientist
EIS Encyclopedic Intelligent Systems LTD
----- Original Message -----
To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <SUO-STATUS@ieee.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 12:03 AM
Subject: SUO: Program wants to work with SUO documents
> SUO WG,
> I have stated many times we need more real users to use our
> starter documents and provide feedback and improvements. We need them
> to develop domain and system ontologies, to develop actual systems and
> tools. We need them to propose new concepts and axioms, plus identify
> flaws that really matter to their systems. This will all provide
> valuable feedback to improve these documents.
> We now have at least one program to do this. The Battle
> Information & Knowledge Exchange (BIKE) Program is a 4-year R&D program
> at my employer (US Army) that needs a common upper ontology and wants
> to start working with one or more or our starter documents. Mr. Kenneth
> Beam is the manager of the program and Ms. Lisa Tran will be working the
> ontology aspect of it. Ken is out on paternity leave, but Lisa has
> joined the SUO list and will introduce herself shortly.
> BIKE now needs expert input on the attributes of each of our
> documents, from all perspectives. Perhaps other potential users will
> also value this analysis.
> Suggested approach:
> a. Develop an evaluation form with specific questions, but also
> allow free-form input. Below is a strawman list of questions. Please
> send any edits/additions/deletions, then let's use our consensus process
> to finalize the list.
> b. Keep the questions generic to any user, since BIKE wants a
> potentially broadly acceptable upper ontology anyway.
> c. Anyone may provide input, even if not a member of SUO or
> subscribed to this list. Candidate ontologies should not be limited to
> just SUO starter documents.
> d. To keep the inputs manageable and easy to review, permit only
> one evaluation form per person per ontology; however, allow submission
> of updated forms. Allow rebuttals.
> e. Post all evaluation forms and rebuttals to the SUO web site in
> an orderly fashion. Since this will require daily web work, Oanh Trinh
> of the BIKE program is willing to help.
> To get started, please send edits to the below list of evaluation
> Jim Schoening
> Chair, IEEE P1600.1 Standard Upper Ontology Working Group
> Strawman Evaluation Questions for Common Upper Ontologies
> 1. Maturity: (How ready is it to use now? What capabilities have already
> been demonstrated? Time and resources needed to start using? Potential
> for improvement.)
> 2. Robustness: (Heavy weight vs. light weight ontology features?
> Potential for improving robustness? How well will it handle known
> requirements, such as those listed in SUO Scope and Purpose.)
> 3. Potential for broad acceptance: (How well will it support maximum
> number of domains?)
> 4. Language Flexibility: (What ontology language is it in? How stable is
> language?If desired, could it be written in a different ontology
> 5. Ownership/Cost/Changes: (Who owns it? Any proprietary restrictions on
> use? Any charges for utilization? How will it get changed and who
> controls the changes? Is it being developed by a Standards Developing
> 6. Domain Friendly (How easy to develop domain ontologies based on upper
> 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!