Re: Avoiding the pitfalls of ontology development
Jim,
This sounds like a good idea. Please count me in.
Best,
John Velman
On Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 10:18:12PM -0500, James R Schoening wrote:
> John and Ron,
>
> The development of a guidance document would be well-within the
> scope of this working group. It would require a new Project
> Authorization Request (PAR). I believe IEEE standards fall into the
> categories of standards, recommended practices, and guides.
> I'd suggest that if anyone is interested in pursuing this, I'll
> set up a separate discussion list for focused discussion. I'd suggest
> making a little progress before submitting a PAR.
>
> Jim Schoening
>
> On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:15:53 +0100 Ronald Cornet <R.Cornet@amc.uva.nl>
> writes:
> > At 23:43 24-11-04 -0500, John F. Sowa wrote:
> > >That's why I suggested that we address the problem of
> > >working on a document about principles for developing
> > >and defining ontologies. I think that could be a
> > >document that we could agree to more quickly than
> > >a complete upper ontology, and it would be very
> > >welcome for a very wide audience.
> >
> >
> > I second that!
> > There IS a need for a description of such principles.
> > In the field of medicine, much work is being done, much good work is
> > being
> > done.
> > But the question remains whether the good work is being done good.
> >
> > Regards, Ronald
> >
> >
> > ######################################################################
> > Ronald Cornet, M.Sc. email:
> > R.Cornet@amc.uva.nl
> > dept. of Medical Informatics phone: +31 (0)20 566
> > 5188
> > Academic Medical Center, Room J1B-114 fax: +31 (0)20 691
> > 9840
> > P.O.Box 22700
> > 1100 DE Amsterdam
> > The Netherlands 'The truth is out
> > there'
> >
> >
>