Re: Methodology?

I think we have already share quite a lot of valuable references on this 
list. So that we do not lose track, can everyone also look to categorize 
and archive these references on the W3C wiki at the following location

http://esw.w3.org/topic/DisasterManagement

Chamindra de Silva
http://chamindra.googlepages.com


paola.dimaio@gmail.com wrote:
> Gav,
> 
> here is a good paper as an introduction
> 
> http://www.jukm.org/jukm_1_3/consensus_building_in_collaborative/jukm_1_3_0199_0216_karapiperis.pdf 
> <http://www.jukm.org/jukm_1_3/consensus_building_in_collaborative/jukm_1_3_0199_0216_karapiperis.pdf>
> 
> That's a good overview of the scientific method, but please note that 
> none of what is currently in place is considered final, satisfactory and 
> complete
> 
> everything is in flux, and we are part of it
> 
> My preferred approach is KISS, and borrow elements from methodologies 
> that we like
> to build our own way of doing things, while referencing and learning 
> existing good practices
> 
> look forward to ideas
> 
> cheers
> 
> P
> 
> 
>         3. I'm getting a vibe that quite a few on this list want to go
>         entirely with a distributed, individualistic approach to designing
>         this ontology - letting two individuals connect to match needs etc,
>         without actually considering any interaction with either emergency
>         services, government agencies or non-governmental organisations.
> 
>      
>     Again, I am not sure how you get that vibe from. Personally in
>     creating ontology the approach is scientific and aimed to create a
>     shared, factual viewpoint as the basis of  common understanding.  We
>     specifically use 'ontology engineering methods' to ensure that.
> 
>     When it comes to collaborative ontology building, such methods are
>     still experimental, so in a way, we are working with something
>     relatively new.
> 
>

Received on Saturday, 23 June 2007 14:19:41 UTC