SUO: RE: SUO-STAT Program wants to work with SUO documents
See some comments on the questionnaire below.
Shell Information Technology International Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: 24 February 2004 22:04
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org; SUO-STATUS@ieee.org
> Subject: SUO-STAT 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
> 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?
> for improvement.)
> 2. Robustness: (Heavy weight vs. light weight ontology features?
MW: What does that mean?
> Potential for improving robustness?
MW: What would be an example of that?
> 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
MW: I think you should ask a question about the principles and foundations
of the ontology, and perhaps just for "any additional information".
> 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!