RE: SUO: Vote on Merged Ontology as a 'Base Document' for SUO WG
To all
I concur with the vote below for the reasons below.
If we can't get our big four to agree on an item, it needs more work/
John H. Dickert
DTIC-OCQ
jdickert@dtic.mil
(703) 767-9014
(AV) 427-9014
(FAX) 9244
-----Original Message-----
From: Frederick N. Chase [mailto:fnc@mitre.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 3:15 PM
Cc: Standard-Upper-Ontology (E-mail)
Subject: Re: SUO: Vote on Merged Ontology as a 'Base Document' for SUO
WG
SUO,
I vote NO (re establishing Ian Niles' Merged Ontology as a base document),
reasoning as follows.
The group is in a productive challenge-response mode.
The Merged Ontology should be a working paper.
Formal votes should be taken, after discussion, on each
of the several ways it is claimed to be fundamentally flawed:
1) Requirement for a representation of time and change,
2) Requirement for a representation of alternative courses of reality,
3) Disallowance of incommensurate views unrelated to one another,
4) .....
-Fred Chase