Re: K3D TPAC Presentation - Vocabulary Slide for Demo A

Daniel
I completely apologise for my tone and for suggesting enrolment in my
courses

This was intended ironically and resulting of my own frustration in reading
your AI generated materials and responses

I rephrase:  it seems that you are not familiar with the spatial knowledge
representation domain
and I suggest you familiarise yourself with the learning resources available
*it is true tho that if you need specific guidance from me you need to
enrol in one of my courses


I am glad to receive an email from you that sounds written by a human,
expressing human concerns
what about if in your 10 minutes slot today we discuss where you are coming
from *that is what is colloquially referred to as coming from
another planet, and you get the chance to air exactly all the points that
you state in your email below
PLUS give a demo
and we can take things from there?

I apologise sincerely for causing offense and once again thank you for
stepping up and enabling this exchange

P


On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 12:12 PM Daniel Ramos <capitain_jack@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Paola,
>
> You are the chair of this CG and I fully accept that you set the scope and
> decide what is in or out for our agenda. I will respect whatever boundaries
> you define for this group.
>
> At the same time, I want to clarify how I arrived at K3D and why I
> believed it was relevant here. The architecture and the spatial KR
> vocabulary are the result of many months of cross‑domain research and
> engineering work, not something improvised for this CG. The sources I used
> are listed in the K3D documentation and in the public NotebookLM notebook;
> they include work on ontologies, spatial reasoning, neurosymbolic
> integration and web standards. My background is in electrical engineering
> and systems architecture, and K3D is my attempt to unify those threads into
> a coherent spatial KR paradigm.
>
> By design, K3D spans multiple W3C concerns – it touches at least ten CG/WG
> topic areas. AI‑KR is only one slice of that; I never expected this group
> to adopt the entire architecture. For this CG I have been trying to
> contribute only the part that looks like a domain ontology for spatial
> knowledge environments (Houses, Rooms, Nodes, Doors, Galaxy, Tablet), which
> I still see as fitting into your “Domain Ontologies / ODD” ellipse, with
> clear links to KR learning and reliability. If you judge that even this
> domain vocabulary is out of scope for AI‑KR, I will accept that decision
> and focus K3D KR work in other venues.
>
> Regarding your latest request: a serious, state‑of‑the‑art review of
> spatial ontology, with publications, open vocabularies, validated use cases
> and a comparative analysis of how K3D fits, is not something I can produce
> responsibly a few hours before TPAC. I’m willing to do that work, but it
> needs to be done carefully and in writing after the event, not rushed into
> a 10‑minute slot.
>
> I also want to address tone. Remarks like “you haven’t got a clue :-)” or
> suggestions that I should enroll in your courses (with tuition fees) are
> hard to reconcile with the collaborative, volunteer nature of a W3C
> Community Group. I’m participating as an independent engineer, self‑funding
> my hardware and AI usage from very limited circumstances. My time and
> resources are also valuable, and I am here in good faith to contribute to
> knowledge representation, not to be dismissed personally.
>
> For today, to stay within your constraints, I suggest we keep things very
> simple: if you are still open to a brief demo, I can use the one minute you
> offered to show a tiny, concrete example of spatial KR – an “AI‑KR House”
> where a few terms live as Nodes in Rooms and we can see their relationships
> in space. If the group finds that useful, we can discuss it later; if not,
> we can move on to other topics.
>
> Thank you for considering this, and regardless of how you decide to scope
> this CG, I appreciate the opportunity to have engaged with AI‑KR and will
> continue this work across the broader W3C ecosystem.
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel
> On 11/14/25 12:57 AM, Paola Di Maio wrote:
>
> Thank you  Daniel
> I can see what the problem is
> You havent got a clue :-)
> But you are willing to lern right?
> and you have a powerful machine at your fingertips right?
>
> You have to enrol in one of my courses... or do self study
> Let me point you in the right direction, but please note,
> I do charge tuition fees
>
> For today if you like, please give a ten minute overview
>
> provide a state of the art review of 'spatial ontology' including
> 1. relevant publications, for example
>
> http://www.fb10.uni-bremen.de/anglistik/langpro/webspace/jb/repository/downloads/del2.pd
> 2. a list of open vocabularies in the spatial knowledge domain
> 3. a list of VALID use cases
> 4. how does your architecture fit in the picture of existing spatial KR,
>
>
> I am sorry I cannot allocate agenda time to present a vocab which clearly
> showing... that you are on another planet
> (note: everyone here is another planet as well)
>
> but the demo..... would be okay..... what do you think.... provided it
> shows some
> capability  related to KR and Spatial domain
>
> I thin, you can have one minute, if the demo is interesting we can spend
> more time on it
> If it does something else, we ll simpty move on to another topic *lots to
> discuss
>
> I thank you Daniel, for helping us to figure out that we have a lot of
> work to be done
>
>