Re: Ontolex as an ISO international standard

On 02.11.2016 20:25, Christian Chiarcos wrote:
> Dear all,
>
>> Hi Philipp, Paul, I fully support this move.
>
> Standardizing Ontoles is a logical and necessary next step, and most
> people would probably welcome it. The question is whether ISO is ideal 
> for
> the purpose.
>
>> BTW, is ISO going to take the spec as it is, and propose a standard, 
>> or it will only be the starting point of the notoriously lengthy and 
>> tiring work of an ISO committee?
Dear Christian, Aldo, all,

Myself I have been rather against this step, but feeling unsure about it.
At least I could contribute from Austria.
One aspect was also that DIN (the German ISO Branch) wanted to have 
money from participating organizations (and at the end selling the 
standards).... So that I stepped out from DIN.
I would prefer to continue the W3C path, but if not possible, then why 
not getting the ISO stamp.
There are ways to make sure that some ISO standards are not closed, 
using the informative parts vs the normative part.
In the informative part one could for example serialize the model (for 
exemplifying it) . And well not a big deal  then to "reverse" a ttl or 
RDF/XML back to the ontology.
One thing I know is that  a new ISO item for LMF is planned ( to be 
serialized it in TEI-XML, which I think  is a non-sense, since TEI is 
hierarchical and purely semasiological. And LMF and Lemon support both 
semasiological and onomasiologcal approaches to the lexicon).
So: going for ISO-Lemon/ontolex might lead to interesting debates within 
the corresponding ISO committee :-)
>
> Well, we (or, at least, *someone*) probably cannot avoid the latter, do
> we? In any case, the ISO standardization suffers from insufficient
> transparency, also with respect to sharing and commenting drafts. I
> remember TC37/SC4 drafts should not have been disseminated at some point,
> and some server had to be switched off to prevent people from accessing
> them. If we can make sure (!) that the ISO standardization process does
> not hamper community involvement (at least at an informal level), I am
> inclined to support it. Even though it means that the development process
> will be partially taken from the hands of the current (open) community
> (that's also what ISO means).
>
> Does anyone has personal experience with the double ISO-W3C
> standardization processes?
No, but I found this: http://www.iso.org/iso/news.htm?refid=Ref1670 (no 
time to read it right now)
Cheers

Thierry
>
> Best,
> Christian

-- 
Thierry Declerck,
Senior Consultant at DFKI GmbH, Language Technology Lab
Stuhlsatzenhausweg, 3
D-66123 Saarbruecken
Phone: +49 681 / 857 75-53 58
Fax: +49 681 / 857 75-53 38
email: declerck@dfki.de

-------------------------------------------------------------
Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Kuenstliche Intelligenz GmbH
Firmensitz: Trippstadter Strasse 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern

Geschaeftsfuehrung:
Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
Dr. Walter Olthoff

Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes

Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313
-------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Wednesday, 2 November 2016 20:01:08 UTC