Rick, (01)
Thank you for questioning the maturity model in the paper. I did some
review and there is a different version that is probably better. It's the
'Technology Readiness Level' described by Wikipedia at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_Readiness_Level. (02)
The 'Software' Readiness Level that I had used is a derivation of the
above, but is no better a model for our purposes than the original. Thanks. (03)
It has been said, "All models are wrong, some are useful." This paper
uses this model to better define what technologies are mature/ready/current vs.
those not ready for implementation. The point of the paper is that current
technologies cannot achieve semantic interoperability across many domains,
while emerging technologies may work, but are not ready for implementation, and
therefore must be further explored, demonstrated, and developed. (04)
Jim Schoening (05)
-----Original Message-----
From: cuo-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cuo-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of richard murphy
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 7:25 PM
To: common upper ontology working group
Subject: Re: [cuo-wg] Technical maturity of Semantic Web solution (06)
Jim, Pat & All: (07)
I'd like to suggest the approach Pat has described is working and its working
everywhere, In fact, you'll find some very interesting work on this site:
http://rhizomik.net/livingsw/ in which the research shows the semantic web
behaves like a living system. (08)
I've also suggested an alternative approach here: (09)
http://colab.cim3.net/forum//cuo-wg/2007-02/msg00012.html (010)
to assessing maturity which I believe is consistent with what you, Pat, are
saying about "letting loose a method of social interaction." (011)
Pat, any thoughts ? (012)
However, Jim, to assess maturity using this approach we'd have to better
understand how you're technical maturity scale relates maturity and
scaleability. (013)
I believe posing and examining alternatives to your maturity scale is important
and deserves debate. Thomas Kuhn, in the Structure of Scientific Revolutions
says that scientists will hold onto a failing theory until an alternative is
posed and compared. (014)
I'm not sure why you'd want to perpetuate a *not so good* maturity model, but
maybe that says something about the audience for the paper. (015)
--
Best wishes, (016)
Rick (017)
email: rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
web: http://www.rickmurphy.org
cell: 703-201-9129 (018)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/cuo-wg/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/cuo-wg/
To Post: mailto:cuo-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://colab.cim3.net/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/cuo-wg/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/CommonUpperOntologyWG (019)
|