Re: registry of standardization
thanks for that; yes, I see the practical issues and constraints.
results of the standardization process. And what sort of 'standardization
issues' would you expect to be registered?
our own particular concern is treatments of 'space' and 'spatial entities'.
The list of distinct standards where some of these notions are repeated
for, as far as I can see, no particular reason apart from not being
aware of how often it has been done in other standards, is
simply mind-blowing. That is a prime candidate, then, for something
that might be registered. It will be no surprise that the other prime
candidates are all going to be areas of knowledge that have been
addressed in diverse foundational ontology projects. Until at least
this area of standardisation gets cleaned up, I don't think interoperability
is going to be on.
Unfortunately, all of them by necessity work in restricted domains and have
little if any time to devote to efforts beyond their domain.
yes, this is indeed the problem; and I would suspect one area where
ontological developments could make a real difference.
but, as you rightly point out, linking these islands of
knowledge is still a significant challenge that will require enormous
individual and collective effort.
absolutely. I suggest that ontology could be a tool towards