RE: [topicmaps-comment] Re: on the Manhattan project for the KnowledgeSciences

[David Dodds <drdodds42@hotmail.com>]

Paul Prueitt wrote (in part)

"David

...

In supporting the knowledge science & technology community (rather than the
software developer community) we claim that software developers have not
been very good at understanding the needs of knowledge management.  What we
are looking for is a migration of part of the current XML / extreme
programming / topic maps community into the E-Knowledge space, and we wish
to have a IP protection compliance model in place to own the space (and keep
it safe).  Joining BCNGroup now would be helpful. www.bcngroup.org"



One reading of this is that Paul has invited me to join the BCNGroup.
If this a correct reading of that paragraph then Paul might convey to me 
what the process is to do so.

Also if it is a correct reading, Paul do you have in mind some particular 
things I might be doing there?

David Dodds



>From: paul <beadmaster@ontologystream.com>
>To: humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
>CC: categoricalAbstraction <categoricalAbstraction@yahoogroups.com>, 
>topicmaps-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
>Subject: RE: [topicmaps-comment] Re: on the Manhattan project for the 
>Knowledge Sciences
>Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 10:08:13 -0400
>
>
>
>David,
>
>The notion that OntologyStream and BCNGroup is developing is that :
>
>1) Intellectual Property protection is needed by the knowledge science
>community so that as the E-Knowledge community develops a next generation
>knowledge technology that the science community (BCNGroup is a not-for
>profit that has been set up for this purpose) can leverage ownership 
>against
>the establishment.  (Long sentence..sorry).   Summary: a community of real
>scientists have to own the foundations of the new knowledge technologies to
>keep this from being spoiled by the marketing and IT commercialization
>establishment.
>
>2) Provides a .NET type vertical Framework that is designed to support the
>knowledge science & technology community (rather than the software 
>developer
>community).  CoreTalk's inclusion in the first group of partners is
>encouraging in this respect.  We need to build on CoreTalk's iconic
>representation of software behavior so that the behaviors that Don Mitchell
>is talking about can be used as a means of controlling the interaction
>between human communities.  Again, this points to the types of needs that 
>we
>feel are motivating the work that Rex and others are doing in human mark 
>up.
>
>In supporting the knowledge science & technology community (rather than the
>software developer community) we claim that software developers have not
>been very good at understanding the needs of knowledge management.  What we
>are looking for is a migration of part of the current XML / extreme
>programming / topic maps community into the E-Knowledge space, and we wish
>to have a IP protection compliance model in place to own the space (and 
>keep
>it safe).  Joining BCNGroup now would be helpful. www.bcngroup.org
>
>
>You said:
>
>"In Cybernetic terms we need to not only address dramatically the "skill
>level" (lack of it?) in conventional IT and AI (GOFAI), but we also must
>address the (interfering) factors of human factors. IT and GOFAI designs
>tend to ignore or eliminate design aspects of what impact is has having
>HUMANS in the loop. Cybernetic designs INCLUDED them, and so were more
>complete and wholistic. BTW, IT comes from automating bookkeeping and
>sending
>goods or transactions through some conduit, delivery system etc."
>
>and both the points are very relevant.
>
>The human factors aspects of intelligence is what NIMA is looking for in
>their current BAA, and for which I am making a proposal via SAIC this week.
>
>We are proposing to develop a science around the notion (their notion) of
>Human Information Interaction.  This is NOT the type of data mining and
>intelligence on people places and things that Microsoft's research groups
>are doing
>
>http://www.eweek.com/article/0,3658,s=709&a=27381,00.asp
>
>
>The motivation is quite different.
>
>The OntologyStream Knowledge Operating System and other Knowledge
>Technologies are
>
>1) stratified, formative and thus agile
>2) involves that action - perception cycle of human awareness directly
>3) involves the use of semiotics (theory of sign systems) to instantiate a
>descriptive enumeration of type
>
>The business plan and foundational papers is at:
>
>http://www.ontologystream.com/admin/formationCommunities.htm
>
>
>I again point to Tonfoni's work
>
>http://www.bcngroup.org/area3/gtonfoni/tonfoni.htm
>
>regarding the markup of the meaning of text.  When such work is combined
>with a chorographic language about human behavior, then we move into a new
>computer science.
>
>What human markup implies to me is a theory of gestures.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>




David Dodds


_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com