cuo-wg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [cuo-wg] Completed exchange with Jim Hnedler

To: "common upper ontology working group" <cuo-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "ajit kapoor" <ajitorsarah@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 12:31:21 -0500
Message-id: <005201c75514$f4b9c270$6402a8c0@KAPOORSFAMILY>
If we ( including Jim H and Jim S) believe that further practical maturity 
will come from applying these technologies to a real large scale project, 
then let us say so in this report. The theoretical maturity index of 4 on a 
9 pt scale will be interpreted by most CIOs to  just wait and see if IBM or 
MS comes up with a solution. They will not unless there is "MONEY"-as they 
say "show me the money". If DoD continues to fund technology research w/o 
ever leading to be a first user, then we will keep on debating this issue ad 
infinitum. Look at the history-where will the Internet be today?    (01)

Just my opinion.
regards
ajit
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Schoening, James R C-E LCMC CIO/G6" <James.Schoening@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "common upper ontology working group" <cuo-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 12:20 PM
Subject: [cuo-wg] Completed exchange with Jim Hnedler    (02)


> CDSI WG,
>
>      I completed about a dozen email exchanges with Jim Hendler.  Below is 
> his final response.
>
> The attached paper reflects some good points he made.   It now lists 
> "Ontology Mapping and Linking" as a candidate technical solution and 
> recognizes its promise in solving enterprising-wide data interoperability, 
> but still only rates it a 4 on the 9-level Technology Readiness Level 
> scale. (This rating is still open if anyone can give a good example of it 
> being higher or lower.)  He is not embracing or concuring with the paper, 
> but his initial opposition seems to have been resolved by the suggestions 
> (good ones) I made.
>
>      In a day or two, I'll post this again to the SICoP list, and if no 
> other technical comments, will remove the 'draft' and post it to our web 
> site.  I'll then call a teleconference to discuss how to get the paper out 
> to the right people.
>
> Jim Schoening
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Hendler [mailto:hendler@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 5:03 PM
> To: Schoening, James R C-E LCMC CIO/G6
> Subject: Re: Moving out with paper
>
> I agree with you that it is important they [DoD] understand, or at least 
> explore, limitations, but to be honest, what I'd really like to see is DoD 
> move some of this stuff into acquisition, that's where they actually scale 
> maturing technologies in practice, not in the research world - the amount 
> of money in Army research going into data interoperability right now is 
> trivial (and they're cutting back), DARPA which controls most of the IT 
> research money in the DoD is not terribly interested in pushing the area, 
> Air Force has some investment, but not really enough to make things 
> happen.  I think the community needs to tell the DoD that we are ready to 
> play - I think if a company like SAIC, LM or Northrup-Grumman got a big 
> contract to do database interoperability with a requirement that they 
> could not replace existing systems, but had to integrate in place, it 
> would push the field far more than the small research investment ARL has 
> for this stuff.  Heck, the subcontract partneri!
> ng in such an acquisition would probably be more money than a research 
> program in the area (and there'd be a "make it work" aspect) - but I think 
> each of these things is equally unlikely in the near future - data 
> integration remains on everyones list of important problems, but everyone 
> seems to be waiting for commercial industry to solve it - your report will 
> be read by some CIOs as "keep waiting" - but hopefully some other folks 
> will see there's a point here and move budgets - it's a long shot, but 
> what the heck, that's what we do...
>  -JH
>
>
>
>    (03)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------    (04)


>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>     (05)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (06)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>