Re: OWL 2

I understand Ian -- you have your hands full.

We are working on a new paper that will provide examples of about a dozen 
pragmatic uses of the technology at the intersection of  the semantic 
Internet (we include communications / mobile) and the enterprise, pieces of 
which have been well received by very large org CIOs -- may help in funding, 
although by necessity we must restrict some information.

This paper has been very popular with large organizations in particular - 
Unleash the innovation within (very little sales promotion)

And more recently this brief on understanding the semantic enterprise has 
taken the lead: (no sales promotion)

Of course one challenge with adoption of open systems is that one doesn't 
necessarily have an incentive to promote use cases that will then be used by 
entrenched vendors -- in fact we often experience a disincentive -- many 
orgs are just gathering intel for internal projects for example -- expanding 
empires rather than spreading economic diversity -- we are seeking go to 
market partners for these and other reasons.

These are just a few of the structural issues we have come across FYI that 
actually may be useful from a standards design perspective, but overall the 
interest in the semantic enterprise has been very surprising during the past 
year (finally -- third admin I have promoted advanced knowledge systems in 
the U.S. Gov for example, and we still have made very little progress on a 
system-wide basis).

We've had quite a bit of success in communicating the potential for crisis 
prevention, meritocracy, and reduction of information overload -- well over 
ten thousand large orgs now, in some cases hundreds of employees in each. 
One would think by now that achieving the state of a learning 
organization -- particularly in the U.S. Government given a series of 
systemic failures, would be unavoidably obvious, although entrenched 
interests fight on as if nothing has occurred.....

Thanks again for the work.

Kind regards,

Mark Montgomery
Founder- Kyield

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ian Horrocks" <>
To: "Mark Montgomery" <>
Cc: <>
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 7:11 AM
Subject: Re: OWL 2

> Dear Mark,
> Thank you for your comment
>      < 
> 2009Sep/0038.html>
> on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.
> Unfortunately we don't have the resources within the Working Group to 
> produce the kind of material you describe. Hopefully this gap will be 
> filled by third parties such as Kyield.
> Please acknowledge receipt of this email to <mailto:public-owl- 
>> (replying to this email should suffice). In your 
> acknowledgment please let us know whether or not you are satisfied  with 
> the working group's response to your comment.
> Regards,
> Ian Horrocks
> on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group
> On 24 Sep 2009, at 15:19, Mark Montgomery wrote:
>> Just wanted to drop in, say hello, and thanks for continuing to  push OWL 
>> forward. Have just reviewed the wiki and reflecting back  more than a 
>> dozen years to when many of us were struggling with  basic tags in order 
>> to imbed some intelligence into the web, often  frustrated spending far 
>> more time on compatibility issues, which  was taking value from me 
>> personally while preventing the delivery  of higher value to others.
>> The only comment I would make is on communications. The wiki format  is a 
>> good one, but still not they type of communications format  found or 
>> understood in the fickle executive suite. Back when I was  fully engaged 
>> in venture capital while moving Kyield forward, the  two worlds and 
>> cultures (CS and finance) so radically different  that I actually divided 
>> the days, finding that if I attempted to  work on both the same day, both 
>> would suffer.
>> While I suppose one could argue that it's the job of vendors and  end 
>> users to communicate internally and externally, I'm still not  wondering 
>> if a white paper format restricted to standards wouldn't  be helpful in 
>> explaining to business morons why this work is so  relevant. We've 
>> attempted to tone down the sales effort in our  small contribution to 
>> that effort and have been very pleasantly  surprised (shocked is a better 
>> word), particularly with the Unleash  the innovation within piece.
>> Beyond that I will attempt to digest the possibilities for adoption  from 
>> my perch.
>> Thanks again,
>> Mark Montgomery
>> Founder
>> Kyield

Received on Wednesday, 30 September 2009 18:15:50 UTC