- From: Ross Singer <rossfsinger@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:25:11 -0500
- To: Mike Bergman <mike@mkbergman.com>
- Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:16 PM, Mike Bergman <mike@mkbergman.com> wrote: > Finally, as a personal note, I have to say that I find the gratuitously > snide and superior tone of Richard and Ross's comments off-putting. If there > are questions as to why some of us don't engage more on these forums, look > only to the unprofessional aspects of some of the participants and their > dialog. Hmm. If I came across as snide and superior, I sincerely apologize: I put forward umbel as a legitimate solution to the original problem. I explained how I thought it would be used. I commiserated that the documentation does not lead one to easily understand the problem that UMBEL is trying to solve: there is a lot of tension (as well as a lot of prose) on the UMBEL site between it's relationship to opencyc and it's role as a vocabulary to bridge concepts and things. I am also trying to use it to link Library of Congress subject headings to dbpedia and whatnot, so obviously I feel it's a valuable contribution. I definitely understand the amount of energy and time goes into developing a vocabulary like this and that the hairnet over the basketball crack was probably a low blow. Sorry about that. It's a funny image. Still, it didn't help me wrap my head around UMBEL much. -Ross.
Received on Friday, 13 November 2009 03:25:50 UTC