RE: SUO: Lists and archives now working
Folks,
I think Jim has already provided a quite clear reading of how to segment
discussion into the four different lists which now exist. Ontology content
discussion goes into this current standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org list.
The other lists are
- SUO-KIF@ieee.org For KIF or related discussions
- SUO-CE@ieee.org Controlled English as a lanaguage for SUO
- Ontology@ieee.org Ontology discussions not directly related to SUO
Adam
At 11:49 PM 12/1/2000 +1100, Horn, Graham wrote:
>Nicola,
> . Good point. Not only is it good to have a good structure,
>but also unambiguous labels for each component.
>
> . One thing I believe we need is a list for ontology content,
>and I don't know where that should go in your understanding.
>
> . Let's have a go at breaking things down into roughly
>conceptually independent groups. Here's my suggestion.
>1. Administration, voting, sponsorship, funding, etc. issues(at present
>this mainly pertains to issues such as this e-mail);
>2. SUO scope, purpose, applications (these are currently listed under
>"Purpose"), etc. (at present this is relatively stable);
>3. SUO content - the end product (this should soon be the major growth
>area);
>4. SUO-KIF - the "logical" type of ontological presentation (this has
>involved a fair degree of dialogue to date, and is fairly advanced, thanks
>to the work of people like David Whitten);
>5. SUO-CE- the "less technical feeling" type of ontological
>presentation (this has also involved a fair degree of dialogue to date, but
>is less advanced than SUO-KIF),
>6. SUO logic -ensuring that the SUO is rigorous (this has involved
>perhaps the most dialogue, and for a long time, and is the keystone for the
>integrity of the SUO),
>7. Miscellaneous, eg.
>- What is ontology
>- History of ontology
>- Poetry and ontology
>- Ontological aspects of US elections
>- and so on...
>
> . Once again, at the risk of the usual broadsides usually
>directed at me by Jon Awbrey, what do others think? Please someone tell me
>if I've made some technical errors.
>
>
>
>Cheers Graham Horn
>
>Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
>================================================
>Phone: 02.6244.1094
>Fax: 02.6244.1199
>Email: Graham.Horn@aihw.gov.au <mailto:graham.horn@aihw.gov.au>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Nicola Guarino [mailto:Nicola.Guarino@ladseb.pd.cnr.it]
>Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 8:45 PM
>To: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
>Subject: Re: SUO: Lists and archives now working
>
>
>I am confused. I believe that a technical discussion like that about
>individuals should go to the SUO mailing list, while the "ontology"
>mailing list should be reserved to things like
>
>- What is ontology
>- General discussions about ontology and logic
>- Ontology-driven applications
>- History of ontology
>- Poetry and ontology
>- Ontological aspects of US elections
>- and so on...
>
>Moreover, we should absolutely avoid to cross-post messages to multiple
>lists!
>
>If we are not able to keep separate the main SUO list from the
>ontology list, we should merge them (I hope not).
>
>Cheers,
>
>-- Nicola
>
>P.S.: I am planning to only subscribe to the main SUO list...
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>Nicola Guarino
>National Research Council phone: +39 O49 8295751
>LADSEB-CNR fax: +39 O49 8295763
>Corso Stati Uniti, 4 email: Nicola.Guarino@ladseb.pd.cnr.it
>I-35127 Padova
>Italy
>
>http://www.ladseb.pd.cnr.it/infor/ontology/ontology.html
>(***updated 8/11/2000***)
-----------------
Adam Pease
Teknowledge
(650) 424-0500 x571