RachelJudson Posted December 7, 2020 Share Posted December 7, 2020 We hope that you have had opportunity to look through the two survey documents published by the NDTp technical development team. A survey of Top-Level Ontologies A survey of Industry Data Models and Reference Data Libraries If you think there have been omissions, and you would like to submit others for assessment, Matthew and the team would be happy to receive them. Linked here is a proforma that we ask for you to complete. You can post your completed form to the files here in the network and we can pick it up from there. Ontology Assessment Criteria - Proforma We appreciate your interest and involvement to ensure the surveys are as complete as they can be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Cornwell Posted December 22, 2020 Share Posted December 22, 2020 I attach an entry on the UN/CEFACT Core Components Technical Specification, not because I believe it would be a good choice as the single top level ontology, but because its key ideas have been found useful in bottom-up ontology development as described in ISO TR 25100:2012, and I'd like to make the ontology development community aware of that. OMG's MOF is mentioned in the text but not included as a survey item - does anyone know any particular reason? And given the inclusion of generic metamodels, was there any consideration on ISO/IEC 11179 and related standards? Ontology Assessment Criteria - CCTS.xlsx 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew West Posted December 22, 2020 Share Posted December 22, 2020 Noted. We've added this to our list to investigate in the New Year for extending the Top Level Ontologies, and/or Industry Data Models. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts