Actually, thinking back it was Mondale who borrowed the famous comment "Where's
the beef," not Humphry, in asking Gary Hart what big ideas he had in mind to
change the world.
Again, "collaboration" seems to be the ephemeral buzz word, or "elevator
description," of the goal for OHS/DKR and other efforts to use technology more
effectively for knowledge work. This objective has a better chance to succeed,
if we collaborate now to learn the architecture of human thought that grows
knowledge and builds shared meaning, in order to discover what tools to build.
The tools are a long time coming because, as you and others have noted,
usefulness evolves through experience working with versions 1 and 2. But
collaboration, communication, cooperation to build shared meaning that forms a
culture of KM, can commence immediately.
A simple example, make a rule that web site references by contributors must
include an explanation by the contributor of how the reference relates to the
requirements you prepared, and to Doug's Launch Plan, which is really a
statement of objectives. The effort to analyze connections between new
material, and objectives will grow a body of knowledge that reveals the secret
of KM, so that requirements, design and specs will eventually yield useful
Maybe that's here the beef is, i.e., in building a culture of KM. If we do
that, the tools will take care of themselves.
Rod Welch wrote:
> This probably sounds dumb, since your question implies a predicate that I may
> have missed. However, are none of the Augment NLS developers around? Seems
> like someone mentioned that a lead technologist who helped develop Doug's
> later went to work for Sun. We, also, have the program itself, which
> Doug has been using all along. Why can't these help?
> Your report some time back seemed to explain Augment NLS has powerful linking
> and multiple views accomplished by efficient key combinations. This seems to
> the starting point for OHS, which Doug submitted in the Launch Plan on
> For some reason key contributors, like you, Joe, Jack, Eugene, Lee and others
> seem to have similar ideas about what is needed, but there is precious little
> coordinated effort to work through issues. While there may be understandable
> reticence to begin passing around code, particularly since requirements,
> and specs are not settled (although Paul's Termite method argues "let there be
> code"), but, it seems like the stuff on categories and ontology, for example,
> provide an obvious nexus for collaboration, which is a big goal of the overall
> In this political season, remember Hubert Humphrey asking Gary Hart in a
> presidential campaign of yesteryear "Where's the beef?" So, "Where's the
> Is there a lot of collaboration going on in the background, or must this await
> the new core team? I suppose we could say the same about collaboration on
> Augment, which is your point. At the risk of being boring, a little less IT,
> and a little more KM would expedite progress.
> Eric Armstrong wrote:
> > Hello?
> > No one has an idea what Augment did internally
> > on this point?
> > eGroups Sponsor
> > Community email addresses:
> > Post message: unrev-II@onelist.com
> > Subscribe: unrev-IIfirstname.lastname@example.org
> > Unsubscribe: unrev-IIemail@example.com
> > List owner: unrev-IIfirstname.lastname@example.org
> > Shortcut URL to this page:
> > http://www.onelist.com/community/unrev-II
> eGroups Sponsor
> Community email addresses:
> Post message: unrev-II@onelist.com
> Subscribe: unrev-IIemail@example.com
> Unsubscribe: unrev-IIfirstname.lastname@example.org
> List owner: unrev-IIemail@example.com
> Shortcut URL to this page:
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
Post message: unrev-II@onelist.com
List owner: unrev-IIfirstname.lastname@example.org
Shortcut URL to this page:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 07 2000 - 09:30:38 PST