Re: next steps Goals, Objectives

Paola

Please clarify  what you mean. Are you simply saying that KRID has not be
defined outside of AIKRCG discussions?
Carl

On Sun, May 24, 2020, 9:27 PM Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks a lot Carl -
> This looks great -
>
>
>>    - -AIKR reasoning uses KRID identifiers and data
>>    (aka metadata) properties, such as KR TYPE that has a value-set that
>>    includes ' Declarative'-, 'Imperative  (aka procedural)'.
>>
>> but not KRID
>  KRID has not been created   explained, defined nor discussed anywhere
> afaik KRID does not exist (yet)
> so I think this statement is false
>
>
> p
>
>>
>> based on these agreements we are confident that a near-term outcome of
>> our effort will include:
>>
>>    - The AIKRCG Strategy which is published for human and machine
>>    consumption.
>>    - An AIKRCG demonstration, for humans and machines, explaining how an
>>    AI Strategist can produce a performance plan for AIKR objects implemented
>>    by machine learning powered services that are measured by Key Performance
>>    Indicators (KPIs)
>>    - An AIKRCG constructed core ontology (for human and machines)
>>    populated with the essential concepts and distinctions required for  Knowledge-directed
>>    Artificial Intelligence Reasoning Over StratMl Schemas supplemented by Knowledge
>>    objects with KRIDs
>>
>>
>> At the close of Tuesdays meeting we will discuss next steps -please reply
>> to this email if you have Goals, Objectives that should be discussed
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> Carl Mattocks
>> Co-Chair AIKRCG
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> It was a pleasure to clarify
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 10:30 PM Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Carl
>>>
>>> all conversation and exchanges about these CG activities are carried out
>>> through the public mailing list
>>> (private exchanges are not part of the CG activities as such)  This is
>>> why meetings should be publicly announced
>>> on the mailing list and discussions/decisions documented in some form (I
>>> now understand that the meetings you are coordinating every other tuesday
>>> are about stratml adoption rather than about the CG activities in general)
>>>
>>> Look forward to learn more about what you have in mind for KRID
>>>
>>>
>>> pdm
>>> -
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 10:07 AM carl mattocks <carlmattocks@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Strongly suggest that the CG not be copied on one to one discussions.
>>>>
>>>> Carl
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, May 23, 2020, 9:56 PM Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Carl
>>>>> yes, we agreed to continue the discussion via email
>>>>> and I have posted the questions in an email to follow up our agreement
>>>>>
>>>>> but now I dont understand why Paul is replying - you mentioned KRID as
>>>>> your own contribution
>>>>> (if I remember correctly)  I would have expected the reply to come
>>>>> from you
>>>>>
>>>>> I have no preconditions on any topics, and I dont understand what is
>>>>> prompting your question
>>>>> what makes you ask?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 9:52 AM carl mattocks <carlmattocks@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Paola
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have agreed to continue our discussions via email .. if you have
>>>>>> preconditions about what topics can be included please let everyone know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Carl
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, May 23, 2020, 9:43 PM Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  simply trying to figure out what type of values you identify in the
>>>>>>> KRID according to what logic and schema
>>>>>>> and where (what domain) would that be applicable to and to solve
>>>>>>> what problem-
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I dont have an expectation as such -  but I figure anything that
>>>>>>> makes sense would do
>>>>>>> when I asked the question to Carl what exactly is KRID ( the KRID
>>>>>>> proposal emanated from Carl, so I expect Carl to send replies if this
>>>>>>> proposal comes from you, maybe you need to clarify that also)
>>>>>>> he said he would see a top level distinction between declarative and
>>>>>>> procedural
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i then sent an email pondering a few points about that and you reply
>>>>>>> Please start a document where you specify what is KRID and how you
>>>>>>> envision it to work
>>>>>>> then we can talk about it' at the moment, it is very difficult to
>>>>>>> have an intelligent exchange about it :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> pdm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 9:32 AM carl mattocks <
>>>>>>> carlmattocks@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Paola et Al
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please outline your expectations for a taxonomy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Carl
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, May 23, 2020, 9:18 PM Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Paul-
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for reply
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *  In the parsing of a StratML XSD I found that:  *
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is what the question is about -
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What did you parse the text with?
>>>>>>>>> Please share the parser and the output so that we can make better
>>>>>>>>> sense of your observations?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> pdm
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 4:19 AM Paul Alagna <pjalagna@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> namespace hiccup2
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <Paola> pls say how did you process the file- </
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what you meant by your question
>>>>>>>>>> but it sounded to me like "how did you get to realize this?" So,
>>>>>>>>>> I'll answer that one.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Aside from the initial white space, the area of information for
>>>>>>>>>> an XML / XSD document is the beginning brace character "<" up to but not
>>>>>>>>>> including the next brace character "<"; inner split by a ">" token.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> IE <stuff1>stuff2|"<" this "area of information" is also known as
>>>>>>>>>> a "fragment"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The XSD standard has rules about what information items are
>>>>>>>>>> contained in "stuff1" and "stuff2"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In "stuff1" attributes are recorded in the format
>>>>>>>>>> attributeName="attributeValue". If an attribute name is further split into:
>>>>>>>>>> namespaceName ":" localName then further processing is called for.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The XSD standard for namespaces says that a secondary XSD of that
>>>>>>>>>> namespace exists and that a workflow (XSD fragment) for the localName will
>>>>>>>>>> exist.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is accomplished through 3 part mechanism:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1-the namaspace XSD file is declared in the schema statement
>>>>>>>>>> using the "xmlns:" prefix such as <schema xmlns:foo="http//foo---" (oddly
>>>>>>>>>> without the .xsd ending )
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2- the namespace required is named in the attribute name AND/OR
>>>>>>>>>> value.
>>>>>>>>>> like: <element xsd:ref="foo:Fullname"
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 3- that an XSD record exists in the namespace XSD:
>>>>>>>>>> IE <element name=localName-----..</element> existing in foo.xsd
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In the parsing of a StratML XSD I found that:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The StratML.xsd calls for a stratml:Name and but the schema
>>>>>>>>>> pointer "xmlns:stratml=" does NOT point to a valid URI.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is from the StratML.xsd itself
>>>>>>>>>> xmlns:stratml="urn:ISO:std:iso:17469:tech:xsd:stratml_core"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> After a little digging I made the assumption that the usage
>>>>>>>>>> intended was to use the StratML.xsd as the secondary namespace XSD, in
>>>>>>>>>> addition to being the guiding XSD for stratML XML reports.  Because the
>>>>>>>>>> <element name="Name" XSD fragment does exist in this very
>>>>>>>>>> document, I can continue on. "I" can continue because I'm a human.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Any automatic processes like the AIKR information extraction
>>>>>>>>>> tools we are defining and building MUST follow the rules laid out by our
>>>>>>>>>> standards and the standards we dictate.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? , comments?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>> PAUL ALAGNA
>>>>>>>>>> PJAlagna@Gmail.com <PJAlagna@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> 732-322-5641
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>