Re: SUO: Re: Focus and Volume
Jon Awbrey wrote:
> .......
........
......
......
.......
........
.........
>
> 3. Square One is that everybody who makes a contribution to the
> main list probably does so because they honestly believe that
> it has a bearing on what a State of the Art Third Millennium
> Ontology System ought to look like, even if that makes some
> State of the Art 1979 folks uncomfortable with the amount of
> work and the number of different expertises that would really
> be required to avoid cranking out yet another standard that
> all innovative people will have to work against from Day One.
There's a spectrum of views on
the extent to which the SUO should be
pushing the state of the art as opposed to more simply
reflecting current accepted/best practice.
In my opinion, a shared statement on where we are along this spectrum
would give us a metric which would identify a good fraction of all
previously posted paragraphs as not relevant (to the group per se).
> So perceptions about what is "relevant" and what is not, what
> is "general" and what is "specific", are what they always are,
> personal opinions ...........
...
..