Re: AIKR CG Plans and Leadership

Paola

Thanks for progressing my proposal. I am happy to present myself as a
candidate for a co-chair role. Suggest that the membership be formally
informed that for 2020 the group intends to have a co-chair and continue
using  existing manifesto, leveraging STRATML constructs, etc.

cheers
Carl
It was a pleasure to clarify


On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 2:45 AM Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Carl Own and all
>
> Thank you for the suggestions
>
> members are the leaders in this CG :-) of course
>
> A report can be drafted  as soon as we have enough input from members
>
> Here is  an updated form where members can enter their input  on  plan,
> deliverables enter their contribution to the report and give availabilit to
> co chair
>
> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dcl76uozxnpiiDYf2pf3TEPZeJbeiV2LEi2l_-NbvzI/edit
>
>
> Here an older stakeholder survey, with 4 responses
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kKiC6VKZUzo7jvl1vkKyndI2S0HNa_vm2LaxIGzzjXo/edit#gid=1292343924
>
>
> There you indicated your availability to co chair -  would you like to
> make a statement
> (ie add or change the group's initial manifesto?
> https://www.w3.org/community/aikr/
>
> Do you have a suggestion for the nomination process, or shall I just
> nominate you (as the only person who gave availability so far) if nobody
> has objections?
> Anyone else up for nomination?
>
> Let us know if you would like to suggest changes to this form and another
> mechanism to elicit stakeholders inputs on the issues mentioned by Carl
>
> We can then have the contents of the spread sheet exported from csv and
> shaped into StratML
>
> PDM
>
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 10:57 PM carl mattocks <carlmattocks@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Milton, Owen:
>>
>> I agree we need a plan that identifies AIKR deliverables.
>> Building on the momentum created by the awareness work , I propose we use
>> the STRATML created for the eGovernance as our startpoint. Specifically, we
>> should  use the STRAML template to create a new AIKR plan and then connect
>> it to the eGovenance STRATML subplan.
>>
>> Acknowledging that our current chair is overloaded with commitments , I
>> also propose that we (1) confirm that we should continue as a CG and (2)
>> elect  at least two members into leadership positions.
>>
>>
>> Carl Mattocks
>>
>>
>>
>> It was a pleasure to clarify
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 10:43 PM Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Milton, while much of the content of your proposed report is beyond my
>>> scope of knowledge and expertise, I volunteer to render in StratML format:
>>>
>>>     a) your outline for deliverables, as your plan, and
>>>
>>>     b) any set of recommendations for research and standardization that
>>> may gain consensus in the CG, as the CG's proposed plan.
>>>
>>> If one exists, I'd also like to render your research institute's plan in
>>> StratML format, particularly if it differs from a and b, above.
>>>
>>> BTW, this exchange prompted me to recall the proposal Denise Bedford and
>>> I co-authored in 2013 to specify a Human Reference Model:
>>> http://ambur.net/HRMProposal.pdf
>>>
>>> It appears MS is planning to address parts of that puzzle, in a
>>> proprietary manner, in Project Cortex:
>>> http://stratml.us/carmel/iso/MSPCwStyle.xml  The name they've chosen is
>>> of special interest to me in light of its relationship to this article I
>>> published nearly two years ago:
>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/i-only-had-brain-evolving-prefrontal-core-text-internet-owen-ambur/
>>>
>>> Owen
>>> On 11/24/2019 10:10 PM, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I myself, like you Paola and I must assume most of the members of this
>>> Community Group would like to see a report written.
>>>
>>> Personally I am intent on getting some proposals for creation of
>>> standards off the ground as well.
>>>
>>> I will look at what we have produced so far, and what we realistically
>>> can produce in the next three months.
>>>
>>> I am in the process of setting up an applied research institute in which
>>> AI will be a central theme.
>>>
>>> I will create an outline for deliverables, a wiki, and creating an
>>> extensive literature review, and listing of existing institutes, global
>>> programs and projects and a listing of existing standards relevant to AI,
>>> KR, robotics and related subjects.
>>>
>>> All of this structured into a document with an introduction, history of
>>> the subject, brief overview of current state of the art, guidelines
>>> proposed by the UN, European Union etc,, and a set of our CG
>>> recommendations for research and standardization, rounded off with an
>>> extensive literature review and listings and directories could serve as the
>>> initial deliverable.
>>>
>>> This document could then serve as a focus for further discussion in an
>>> IG or production of new deliverables in a continued AIKR CG.
>>>
>>> Creating this deliverable will take 3 months, and because I have to
>>> produce a similar deliverable for my research institute, in less than 3
>>> months, I take it upon myself to get this deliverable produced with
>>> collaboration from members of this CG.
>>>
>>> Volunteers for support and collaboration, comments, suggestions and
>>> ideas are welcome.
>>>
>>> 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 Friday, November 22, 2019, 10:34:07 PM AST, Paola Di Maio
>>> <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Greetings folks
>>>
>>> according to Ian at W3C, the main difference between between a CG and an
>>> IG is
>>>
>>> *Community Groups often produce specifications (called
>>> Community Group Reports). Interest Groups typically do not; they focus on
>>> discussion. *
>>>
>>> I hope this group can produce a report, but because we have not seen
>>> enough contributions
>>> since the group started, and I am really busy working on research papers
>>> and talks, and I am going to be for the next few months despite my wish to
>>> produce something for this group I am struggling to keep up, I wonder if we
>>> should
>>> a) wait until someone perks up to contribute to write a group report,
>>> b)  change this group to an interest group at some point soon
>>>
>>> Thoughts? Objections?
>>> *Have a great weekend*
>>>
>>>
>>> *PDM *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>