Re: public schema for AI ethics

Thanks Milton

my request to Standard Bodies is going to be simply how to reference their
standards in this area
whether we can do it directly - ie they give us access and permission to
reuse the
concepts and words to produce a public schema, with due credits -
or indirectly - by inferring concepts and words from the public literature
and reuse that.

P

On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 11:08 PM ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <
metadataportals@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> In previous much older posts including to other W3C mailing lists (LOD,
> semweb), I have signaled the need for standards for a proposed IOD4
> (internet of data, devices, dna and digital agents), the third, DNA
> referring to living beings or ecosystems, static or mobile, which can be
> assigned IPs.
>
> This stems from the fact that the IoT does not address human and living
> beings.
>
> For the human beings, specifically in the context of heath, eHealth,
> mHealth, wearable technologies etc, as also with electronic health records,
> some standardization is in order.
>
> I contacted the corresponding ISO WGS and TCS, and several other standards
> bodies and they pointed out that proposals can always be submitted either
> by individuals or organizations or groups of people for reviewing the need
> for the proposed standards, and following procedures for initiating the
> process for a new standards category.
>
> In the area of health the Yosemite Project is a key example of trying to
> arrive at a universal framework.
> See: https://www.yosemiteproject.org.
>
> So it is pretty much up to ourselves to decide where and what we want to
> set as objectives in terms of standards.
>
> Milton Ponson
> GSM: +297 747 8280
> PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
> Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
> Project Paradigm: Bringing the ICT tools for sustainable development to
> all stakeholders worldwide through collaborative research on applied
> mathematics, advanced modeling, software and standards development
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 12, 2019 7:26 AM, Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Thank you Dave
>
> I am a member of IEEE, but not of BSI and ISO as yet
>
> of these three I know there is AI ethics activity (sometimes referenced
> under responsible autonomy )
>
> I ll do some surveying on other orgs such as OASIS? ETSI?
>
>  Please let me know who to contact and how to proceed, perhaps offlist
>
> I ll upload copies of communication I undertake on behalf of this group to
> this effect
> It is likely to be something like 'hay this is what we plan to do, how do
> we go about collaborating'
>
> P
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 6:55 PM Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> wrote:
>
> W3C has formal liaisons, but in practice, we depend on individual members
> of W3C groups to actively liaise with other standards development
> organisations.  If you are involved in both organisations that is a big
> help, but if not, perhaps you may be able to regularly chat with colleagues
> who are involved in other standards development organisations.
>
> On 12 Mar 2019, at 04:53, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> *QUESTION* for Dave R
> does W3C have experience in coordinating with other standardization bodies
> such as ISO, IEEE and BSI?
> The standards themselves may not be publicly accessible, but surely there
> are papers and books that describe such standards that can be considered
> 'knowledge sources', so I can use these as the references-
> However, maybe W3C has a formal process for engaging in collaboration with
> other standardization bodies that we should adopt/follow?
>
>
> Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
> W3C Data Activity Lead & W3C champion for the Web of things
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>