|[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]||Indexes: Main | Date | Thread | Author|
Eric and OHS/DKR team, (01) Gary Johnson raises interesting questions about creating and maintaining a DKR that may elicit productive analysis by the group. (02) Rod (03)
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Rod Welch <email@example.com>
- From: "Garold (Gary) L. Johnson" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 14:42:16 -0700
- Message-id: <MIEJJJFBHJEBDEKGPHOPOENPCPAA.email@example.com>
--- End Message ---
As related at http://www.welchco.com/sd/08/00101/02/01/09/16/213549.HTM#4J4J Eric appears to support the need for an additional role to convert incoming information into a form that is accessible. In the specific case he is talking about Topic Maps, and onotologies, but it is clear that the problem will exist anything that human beings must supply additional information to the communications that they receive in order to convert them into a form that can contribute to their knowledge.
This is a problem with all of KM in general and with SDS specifically.
The problem of having to break apart a communication into the multiple topics that it addresses and to work those pieces into a structure that is more useful than the raw information is an overhead that cannot be entirely removed. Better tools to address some of the issues can help. This is the genesis of my comments in earlier emails that having SDS might benefit from providing tools for the Com Manager that assist in this task.
SDS provides some capability by supporting the ability to add commentary to incoming documents. It would seem that anything we can do to support the Com Officer in organizing incoming communications and constructing outgoing communications would improve his ability to perform in the role.
Garold (Gary) L. Johnson