[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep-semantic] [Fwd: RE: Ontology Management Liaision]
Much like the core components folk have identified a finite classification scheme for their 'Business Entities' I assume the scope of the 'Standard Upper Ontology' would be a good fit for the IEEE Universe. In both cases a 'repository' is useful for linking to the 'lower level' structures (aggregate components & domain ontologies) "ewallace@cme.nist.gov"> > > >>Please note Jim is the Chair of the IEEE P1600.1 Standard Upper Ontology >>Working Group (SUO WG) ... a number of their recent discussions have >>focused on the value / characteristics of an "Ontology Repository " > > That is an interesting fundamental change in philosophy for that > group, at least if it means admitting to the existence of multiple upper > ontology modules. Can anyone elaborate on their thinking here? Is > there any less acrimony in that group than in the past? > > -Evan > > > -- Carl Mattocks co-Chair OASIS (ISO/TS 15000) ebXMLRegistry Semantic Content SC co-Chair OASIS Business Centric Methodology TC CEO CHECKMi v/f (usa) 908 322 8715 www.CHECKMi.com Semantically Smart Compendiums (AOL) IM CarlCHECKMi
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]