The Outliner of Giants was commercial outlining software. Like other outliners, it allowed the user to create a document consisting of a series of nested lists. It was one of a number of browser-based outliners that are delivered as a web application, used through a web browser, rather than being installed as a stand-alone application. The Outliner of Giants was released in 2009. The service was shut down on December 31, 2017 and only exports are allowed at this time. == Feature set == Unlike most other browser-based outliners - which often focus on providing a minimum viable product - the Outliner of Giants had much of the functionality typically associated with a desktop outliner, such as the ability to use of columns to structure information. However, The Outliner of Giants did not support offline editing, requiring an active internet connection in order to make changes to an outline document. === Outlining === Like all outliners, The Outliner of Giants supported the creation of a hierarchy of items, with users modifying the parent-child relationship between items in order to structure a document. This included the ability to promote or demote items up or down the hierarchy, or move an item up or down a list of siblings on the same level. The Outliner of Giants did not support the true cloning of items (where an item can appear to be in multiple places within the hierarchy at the same time), although it did support the copying of single or multiple nodes. === Import === The Outliner of Giants could import both plain text and the OPML XML format, which is commonly used to transfer data between outlining applications. === Editing === Outline documents could be edited using a WYSIWYG editor, as well as the Markdown, and Textile markup languages. === Annotation === The Outliner of Giants supported functions to annotate an outline, such as the ability to add colored labels, highlights and text, as well as tags and hashtags. === Collaboration === The Outliner of Giants supported real-time collaboration, where multiple users could edit the same document, and can see the changes made by another user as they happened. === Publication === Outlines created through The Outliner of Giants could be published directly online through the service, either as outlines, pages or in a blog format. === Export === The Outliner of Giants can export outline data as plain text, HTML, as well as directly to the Google Docs word processor.
Depop
Depop Limited is a social e-commerce company based in London, with additional offices in Milan and New York City. The company allows users to buy and sell items, which are mostly used and vintage pieces of clothing. == History == Depop was founded in 2011 by entrepreneur Simon Beckerman at an Italian technological incubator and business start-up centre, H-Farm. Beckerman came up with the original outline of the application during his time working on PIG, a fashion magazine based in Italy that he co-founded. The idea was to create a platform where products shown in the magazine could be purchased by users online. This idea turned into a concept similar to a flea market but on the internet, where people could sell their items while also being in control of advertising, public relations, and the creative process behind their accounts. While being financially supported by H-Farm, Beckerman worked within a team to create and lay out the Depop application while exposing it to numerous investors. In 2013, Beckerman became a member of the company's board to help improve the application and business while concurrently ceding his role of CEO. Maria Raga, Depop's co-founder and former CEO, took on the role of vice president of operations in 2014, and in 2016, she became chief executive. According to Raga, the main goal while developing Depop was to become the next Airbnb or Spotify, but to make an impact on fashion. Paolo Barberis and Nana Bianca were two of the first investors in the platform in 2012 with a seed investment. Its headquarters were moved to London in 2012. Depop expanded and opened additional offices in Milan and New York City. Beckerman raised €1 million in funding in October 2013 from Red Circle Investment and brought on Faroese Runar Reistrup as new CEO. In 2015, Depop secured another investment of $8 million from Balderton Capital and HV Capital. In March 2016, former CEO, Runar Reistrup, stated that Depop's growth was achieved through word of mouth. During his time as CEO, this growth involved taking Depop as a startup and working to raise funds to eventually amass a significant user base within the United States. In June 2019, Depop raised $62 million in Series C from General Atlantic to fund its expansion. Previous investors HV Capital, Balderton Capital, Creandum, Octopus Ventures, TempoCap and Sebastian Siemiatkowski also participated. During this time, Depop held workshops and conversations as part of their Depop Live NY events, and the company also opened a London store through their partnership with Selfridges. In 2020, Depop's gross merchandise sales and revenue both more than doubled to $650 million and $70 million respectively. This may be attributed to Depop's responsiveness to user trends, its lack of issues regarding inventory management, and the increase in users looking to resell. As of 2024, Depop has over 35 million users, according to their website. Depop is popular for Gen Z and young millennials, it is the 10th most-visited shopping platform for Gen Z consumers in the US, and, in a poll conducted by The Strategist in 2019, Depop was voted by teenagers as their favorite resale website. === Acquisition by Etsy === In June 2021, Depop was acquired by Etsy for $1.6 billion in cash, making it Etsy's most expensive acquisition; however, Depop continues to operate as a standalone brand independent from Etsy. This means that in addition to Depop keeping its existing team, the company retained its London location. At the time of acquisition, Etsy CEO Josh Silverman’s goal was to counteract the influx of buyers starting to go back to physical shops for their purchases. He saw Depop for its potential as a platform supporting a variety of products and creating a greater community of users. According to Silverman, Depop may expand and improve its services for its significant Gen Z user base. For Etsy, this acquisition maintains the company's foothold in the clothing industry and allows the company to expand its customer base to a younger demographic; at the same time, Depop is now able to make use of Etsy's company operations. When Maria Raga relinquished her position as Depop's CEO in 2022, Etsy assigned the role to Kruti Patel Goyal, who was Etsy's former chief product officer and a leader there for eleven years. When Goyal was appointed president and chief growth officer for Etsy in May, Peter Semple, former chief marketing officer, was assigned CEO of Depop officially on August 1st. === Acquisition by eBay === In February 2026, Etsy announced a proposed sale of Depop to eBay for $1.2 billion that was estimated to close within the year. == Business model == === Selling === Depop operates as a marketplace and social platform, where users can follow friends and other influencers to view their buying and selling activities. Through the platform, users are able to sell branded and designer items, as well as vintage pieces. Depop users are also encouraged by the platform to use other social networking services such as Instagram to promote their shop profiles. Celebrities have resold their own items on Depop, with some donating proceeds to charitable causes. Depop's user interface is modeled after that of Instagram. According to Depop, users who list and sell items provide their own photos with item descriptions. Users also note their designer items' authenticity and if they include any labels, tags, and receipts. These listings will appear in users' feeds. The platform's "Explore" page features items picked out by Depop staff. According to Depop, purchases are made via Apple Pay, Google Pay, credit and debit cards, and Klarna. Depop payments stay in-app, allowing for the company to mediate disputes and process refunds. Depop payments allow sellers to directly receive their payments in their bank account. To get paid by Depop, a seller has to add a bank account and verify their identification by uploading an ID. On July 18, 2024, Depop CEO Kruti Patel Goyal announced the removal of selling fees for US sellers, while maintaining a payment processing fee. This policy adjustment aimed to enhance seller revenue and support the growth of the second-hand market. === Buying === A Depop transaction includes the agreed sale price of the item, shipping fees, VAT or other applicable taxes and duties, and the marketplace fee for buyers in the U.S. or U.K. For international deliveries, packages may be subject to import taxes, customs duties, or fees, payable upon arrival or at checkout if Depop collects the tax on behalf of the buyer. For domestic purchases, relevant taxes may be collected by the seller or charged by the platform at checkout, ensuring no additional taxes are due upon delivery. For users in Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, Depop allows users to receive a full refund if their item does not arrive, arrives damaged, or is considerably different from the original when the issue is reported within 30 days. === Competitors === As of June 2021, Depop's competitors include Vinted, a platform founded by Milda Mitkute and Justas Janauskas in 2008 and valued at €3.5 billion, as well as the U.S. resale site Poshmark, valued at $3.5 billion. Additional competitors include Grailed, a peer-to-peer e-commerce site founded in 2014 that is recognized for its high-end second-hand menswear and streetwear, and Vestiaire Collection, a European resale app established in 2009 which specializes in authenticated pre-owned luxury items. The popularity of Depop has negatively impacted traditional second-hand stores, which can struggle to compete due to high labor costs and quality demands. There is an oversupply of clothes with the rise of fast fashion; this has taken a toll on the revenue aspect of the second-hand clothing industry. == Criticism == In November 2019, Business of Fashion reported that users within the Depop app were receiving sexually suggestive messages. In February 2020, Jessica Hamilton, a Depop buyer, reported that she found many scammers on the platform. She noticed this issue after she attempted to purchase a Nintendo Switch from a seller who would suspiciously only accept payment through a direct bank transfer without buyer protection. Hamilton blamed the company for its lack of action and relaxed security measures compared to other e-commerce sites, which made the platform especially susceptible to hackers. Without a clear strategy for managing scams, Depop lost some users' trust because of its negligence. In October 2020, some Depop buyers were tricked into paying sellers directly to bypass Depop's buyer protections, and the Depop sellers then sold those users' information on the dark web. In response, Depop claimed that it would improve security through mandatory password updates and multi-factor authentication. Users have criticized Depop for belatedly taking action against this issue.
Upper ontology
In information science, an upper ontology (also known as a top-level ontology, upper model, or foundation ontology) is an ontology (in the sense used in information science) that consists of very general terms (such as "object", "property", "relation") that are common across all domains. An important function of an upper ontology is to support broad semantic interoperability among a large number of domain-specific ontologies by providing a common starting point for the formulation of definitions. Terms in the domain ontology are ranked under the terms in the upper ontology, e.g., the upper ontology classes are superclasses or supersets of all the classes in the domain ontologies. A number of upper ontologies have been proposed, each with its own proponents. Library classification systems predate upper ontology systems. Though library classifications organize and categorize knowledge using general concepts that are the same across all knowledge domains, neither system is a replacement for the other. == Development == Any standard foundational ontology is likely to be contested among different groups, each with its own idea of "what exists". One factor exacerbating the failure to arrive at a common approach has been the lack of open-source applications that would permit the testing of different ontologies in the same computational environment. The differences have thus been debated largely on theoretical grounds, or are merely the result of personal preferences. Foundational ontologies can however be compared on the basis of adoption for the purposes of supporting interoperability across domain ontologies. No particular upper ontology has yet gained widespread acceptance as a de facto standard. Different organizations have attempted to define standards for specific domains. The 'Process Specification Language' (PSL) created by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is one example. Another important factor leading to the absence of wide adoption of any existing upper ontology is the complexity. Some upper ontologies—Cyc is often cited as an example in this regard—are very large, ranging up to thousands of elements (classes, relations), with complex interactions among them and with a complexity similar to that of a human natural language, and the learning process can be even longer than for a natural language because of the unfamiliar format and logical rules. The motivation to overcome this learning barrier is largely absent because of the paucity of publicly accessible examples of use. As a result, those building domain ontologies for local applications tend to create the simplest possible domain-specific ontology, not related to any upper ontology. Such domain ontologies may function adequately for the local purpose, but they are very time-consuming to relate accurately to other domain ontologies. To solve this problem, some genuinely top level ontologies have been developed, which are deliberately designed to have minimal overlap with any domain ontologies. Examples are Basic Formal Ontology and the DOLCE (see below). === Arguments for the infeasibility of an upper ontology === Historically, many attempts in many societies have been made to impose or define a single set of concepts as more primal, basic, foundational, authoritative, true or rational than all others. A common objection to such attempts points out that humans lack the sort of transcendent perspective — or God's eye view — that would be required to achieve this goal. Humans are bound by language or culture, and so lack the sort of objective perspective from which to observe the whole terrain of concepts and derive any one standard. Thomasson, under the headline "1.5 Skepticism about Category Systems", wrote: "category systems, at least as traditionally presented, seem to presuppose that there is a unique true answer to the question of what categories of entity there are – indeed the discovery of this answer is the goal of most such inquiries into ontological categories. [...] But actual category systems offered vary so much that even a short survey of past category systems like that above can undermine the belief that such a unique, true and complete system of categories may be found. Given such a diversity of answers to the question of what the ontological categories are, by what criteria could we possibly choose among them to determine which is uniquely correct?" Another objection is the problem of formulating definitions. Top level ontologies are designed to maximize support for interoperability across a large number of terms. Such ontologies must therefore consist of terms expressing very general concepts, but such concepts are so basic to our understanding that there is no way in which they can be defined, since the very process of definition implies that a less basic (and less well understood) concept is defined in terms of concepts that are more basic and so (ideally) more well understood. Very general concepts can often only be elucidated, for example by means of examples, or paraphrase. There is no self-evident way of dividing the world up into concepts, and certainly no non-controversial one There is no neutral ground that can serve as a means of translating between specialized (or "lower" or "application-specific") ontologies Human language itself is already an arbitrary approximation of just one among many possible conceptual maps. To draw any necessary correlation between English words and any number of intellectual concepts, that we might like to represent in our ontologies, is just asking for trouble. (WordNet, for instance, is successful and useful, precisely because it does not pretend to be a general-purpose upper ontology; rather, it is a tool for semantic / syntactic / linguistic disambiguation, which is richly embedded in the particulars and peculiarities of the English language.) Any hierarchical or topological representation of concepts must begin from some ontological, epistemological, linguistic, cultural, and ultimately pragmatic perspective. Such pragmatism does not allow for the exclusion of politics between persons or groups, indeed it requires they be considered as perhaps more basic primitives than any that are represented. Those who doubt the feasibility of general purpose ontologies are more inclined to ask "what specific purpose do we have in mind for this conceptual map of entities and what practical difference will this ontology make?" This pragmatic philosophical position surrenders all hope of devising the encoded ontology version of "The world is everything that is the case." (Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus). Finally, there are objections similar to those against artificial intelligence. Technically, the complex concept acquisition and the social / linguistic interactions of human beings suggest any axiomatic foundation of "most basic" concepts must be cognitive biological or otherwise difficult to characterize since we don't have axioms for such systems. Ethically, any general-purpose ontology could quickly become an actual tyranny by recruiting adherents into a political program designed to propagate it and its funding means, and possibly defend it by violence. Historically, inconsistent and irrational belief systems have proven capable of commanding obedience to the detriment or harm of persons both inside and outside a society that accepts them. How much more harmful would a consistent rational one be, were it to contain even one or two basic assumptions incompatible with human life? === Arguments for the feasibility of an upper ontology === Many of those who doubt the possibility of developing wide agreement on a common upper ontology fall into one of two traps: they assert that there is no possibility of universal agreement on any conceptual scheme; but they argue that a practical common ontology does not need to have universal agreement, it only needs a large enough user community (as is the case for human languages) to make it profitable for developers to use it as a means to general interoperability, and for third-party developer to develop utilities to make it easier to use; and they point out that developers of data schemes find different representations congenial for their local purposes; but they do not demonstrate that these different representations are in fact logically inconsistent. In fact, different representations of assertions about the real world (though not philosophical models), if they accurately reflect the world, must be logically consistent, even if they focus on different aspects of the same physical object or phenomenon. If any two assertions about the real world are logically inconsistent, one or both must be wrong, and that is a topic for experimental investigation, not for ontological representation. In practice, representations of the real world are created as and known to be approximations to the basic reality, and their use is circumscribed by the limits of e
EdgeRank
EdgeRank is the name commonly given to the algorithm that Facebook uses to determine what articles should be displayed in a user's News Feed. As of 2011, Facebook has stopped using the EdgeRank system and uses a machine learning algorithm that, as of 2013, takes more than 100,000 factors into account. EdgeRank was developed and implemented by Serkan Piantino. == Formula and factors == In 2010, a simplified version of the EdgeRank algorithm was presented as: ∑ e d g e s e u e w e d e {\displaystyle \sum _{\mathrm {edges\,} e}u_{e}w_{e}d_{e}} where: u e {\displaystyle u_{e}} is user affinity. w e {\displaystyle w_{e}} is how the content is weighted. d e {\displaystyle d_{e}} is a time-based decay parameter. User Affinity: The User Affinity part of the algorithm in Facebook's EdgeRank looks at the relationship and proximity of the user and the content (post/status update). Content Weight: What action was taken by the user on the content. Time-Based Decay Parameter: New or old. Newer posts tend to hold a higher place than older posts. Some of the methods that Facebook uses to adjust the parameters are proprietary and not available to the public. A study has shown that it is possible to hypothesize a disadvantage of the "like" reaction and advantages of other interactions (e.g., the "haha" reaction or "comments") in content algorithmic ranking on Facebook. The "like" button can decrease the organic reach as a "brake effect of viral reach". The "haha" reaction, "comments" and the "love" reaction could achieve the highest increase in total organic reach. == Impact == EdgeRank and its successors have a broad impact on what users actually see out of what they ostensibly follow: for instance, the selection can produce a filter bubble (if users are exposed to updates which confirm their opinions etc.) or alter people's mood (if users are shown a disproportionate amount of positive or negative updates). As a result, for Facebook pages, the typical engagement rate is less than 1% (or less than 0.1% for the bigger ones), and organic reach 10% or less for most non-profits. As a consequence, for pages, it may be nearly impossible to reach any significant audience without paying to promote their content.
SciDB
SciDB is a column-oriented database management system (DBMS) designed for multidimensional data management and analytics common to scientific, geospatial, financial, and industrial applications. It is developed by Paradigm4 and co-created by Michael Stonebraker. == History == Stonebraker claims that arrays are 100 times faster in SciDB than in a relational DBMS on a class of problems. It is swapping rows and columns for mathematical arrays that put fewer restrictions on the data and can work in any number of dimensions unlike the conventionally widely used relational database management system model, in which each relation supports only one dimension of records. A 2011 conference presentation on SciDB promoted it as "not Hadoop". Marilyn Matz became chief executive Paradigm4 in 2014.
WaveNet
WaveNet is a deep neural network for generating raw audio. It was created by researchers at London-based AI firm DeepMind. The technique, outlined in a paper in September 2016, is able to generate relatively realistic-sounding human-like voices by directly modelling waveforms using a neural network method trained with recordings of real speech. Tests with US English and Mandarin reportedly showed that the system outperforms Google's best existing text-to-speech (TTS) systems, although as of 2016 its text-to-speech synthesis still was less convincing than actual human speech. WaveNet's ability to generate raw waveforms means that it can model any kind of audio, including music. == History == Generating speech from text is an increasingly common task thanks to the popularity of software such as Apple's Siri, Microsoft's Cortana, Amazon Alexa and the Google Assistant. Most such systems use a variation of a technique that involves concatenated sound fragments together to form recognisable sounds and words. The most common of these is called concatenative TTS. It consists of large library of speech fragments, recorded from a single speaker that are then concatenated to produce complete words and sounds. The result sounds unnatural, with an odd cadence and tone. The reliance on a recorded library also makes it difficult to modify or change the voice. Another technique, known as parametric TTS, uses mathematical models to recreate sounds that are then assembled into words and sentences. The information required to generate the sounds is stored in the parameters of the model. The characteristics of the output speech are controlled via the inputs to the model, while the speech is typically created using a voice synthesiser known as a vocoder. This can also result in unnatural sounding audio. == Design and ongoing research == === Background === WaveNet is a type of feedforward neural network known as a deep convolutional neural network (CNN). In WaveNet, the CNN takes a raw signal as an input and synthesises an output one sample at a time. It does so by sampling from a softmax (i.e. categorical) distribution of a signal value that is encoded using μ-law companding transformation and quantized to 256 possible values. === Initial concept and results === According to the original September 2016 DeepMind research paper WaveNet: A Generative Model for Raw Audio, the network was fed real waveforms of speech in English and Mandarin. As these pass through the network, it learns a set of rules to describe how the audio waveform evolves over time. The trained network can then be used to create new speech-like waveforms at 16,000 samples per second. These waveforms include realistic breaths and lip smacks – but do not conform to any language. WaveNet is able to accurately model different voices, with the accent and tone of the input correlating with the output. For example, if it is trained with German, it produces German speech. The capability also means that if the WaveNet is fed other inputs – such as music – its output will be musical. At the time of its release, DeepMind showed that WaveNet could produce waveforms that sound like classical music. === Content (voice) swapping === According to the June 2018 paper Disentangled Sequential Autoencoder, DeepMind has successfully used WaveNet for audio and voice "content swapping": the network can swap the voice on an audio recording for another, pre-existing voice while maintaining the text and other features from the original recording. "We also experiment on audio sequence data. Our disentangled representation allows us to convert speaker identities into each other while conditioning on the content of the speech." (p. 5) "For audio, this allows us to convert a male speaker into a female speaker and vice versa [...]." (p. 1) According to the paper, a two-digit minimum amount of hours (c. 50 hours) of pre-existing speech recordings of both source and target voice are required to be fed into WaveNet for the program to learn their individual features before it is able to perform the conversion from one voice to another at a satisfying quality. The authors stress that "[a]n advantage of the model is that it separates dynamical from static features [...]." (p. 8), i. e. WaveNet is capable of distinguishing between the spoken text and modes of delivery (modulation, speed, pitch, mood, etc.) to maintain during the conversion from one voice to another on the one hand, and the basic features of both source and target voices that it is required to swap on the other. The January 2019 follow-up paper Unsupervised speech representation learning using WaveNet autoencoders details a method to successfully enhance the proper automatic recognition and discrimination between dynamical and static features for "content swapping", notably including swapping voices on existing audio recordings, in order to make it more reliable. Another follow-up paper, Sample Efficient Adaptive Text-to-Speech, dated September 2018 (latest revision January 2019), states that DeepMind has successfully reduced the minimum amount of real-life recordings required to sample an existing voice via WaveNet to "merely a few minutes of audio data" while maintaining high-quality results. Its ability to clone voices has raised ethical concerns about WaveNet's ability to mimic the voices of living and dead persons. According to a 2016 BBC article, companies working on similar voice-cloning technologies (such as Adobe Voco) intend to insert watermarking inaudible to humans to prevent counterfeiting, while maintaining that voice cloning satisfying, for instance, the needs of entertainment-industry purposes would be of a far lower complexity and use different methods than required to fool forensic evidencing methods and electronic ID devices, so that natural voices and voices cloned for entertainment-industry purposes could still be easily told apart by technological analysis. == Applications == At the time of its release, DeepMind said that WaveNet required too much computational processing power to be used in real world applications. As of October 2017, Google announced a 1,000-fold performance improvement along with better voice quality. WaveNet was then used to generate Google Assistant voices for US English and Japanese across all Google platforms. In November 2017, DeepMind researchers released a research paper detailing a proposed method of "generating high-fidelity speech samples at more than 20 times faster than real-time", called "Probability Density Distillation". At the annual I/O developer conference in May 2018, it was announced that new Google Assistant voices were available and made possible by WaveNet; WaveNet greatly reduced the number of audio recordings that were required to create a voice model by modeling the raw audio of the voice actor samples.
ISO 15926
ISO 15926 is a standard for data integration, sharing, exchange, and hand-over between computer systems. The title, "Industrial automation systems and integration—Integration of life-cycle data for process plants including oil and gas production facilities", is regarded too narrow by the present ISO 15926 developers. Having developed a generic data model and reference data library for process plants, it turned out that this subject is already so wide, that actually any state information may be modelled with it. == History == In 1991 a European Union ESPRIT-, named ProcessBase, started. The focus of this research project was to develop a data model for lifecycle information of a facility that would suit the requirements of the process industries. At the time that the project duration had elapsed, a consortium of companies involved in the process industries had been established: EPISTLE (European Process Industries STEP Technical Liaison Executive). Initially individual companies were members, but later this changed into a situation where three national consortia were the only members: PISTEP (UK), POSC/Caesar (Norway), and USPI-NL (Netherlands). (later PISTEP merged into POSC/Caesar, and USPI-NL was renamed to USPI). EPISTLE took over the work of the ProcessBase project. Initially this work involved a standard called ISO 10303-221 (referred to as "STEP AP221"). In that AP221 we saw, for the first time, an Annex M with a list of standard instances of the AP221 data model, including types of objects. These standard instances would be for reference and would act as a knowledge base with knowledge about the types of objects. In the early nineties EPISTLE started an activity to extend Annex M to become a library of such object classes and their relationships: STEPlib. In the STEPlib activities a group of approx. 100 domain experts from all three member consortia, spread over the various expertises (e.g. Electrical, Piping, Rotating equipment, etc.), worked together to define the "core classes". The development of STEPlib was extended with many additional classes and relationships between classes and published as Open source data. Furthermore, the concepts and relation types from the AP221 and ISO 15926-2 data models were also added to the STEPlib dictionary. This resulted in the development of Gellish English, whereas STEPlib became the Gellish English dictionary. Gellish English is a structured subset of natural English and is a modeling language suitable for knowledge modeling, product modeling and data exchange. It differs from conventional modeling languages (meta languages) as used in information technology as it not only defines generic concepts, but also includes an English dictionary. The semantic expression capability of Gellish English was significantly increased by extending the number of relation types that can be used to express knowledge and information. For modelling-technical reasons POSC/Caesar proposed another standard than ISO 10303, called ISO 15926. EPISTLE (and ISO) supported that proposal, and continued the modelling work, thereby writing Part 2 of ISO 15926. This Part 2 has official ISO IS (International Standard) status since 2003. POSC/Caesar started to put together their own RDL (Reference Data Library). They added many specialized classes, for example for ANSI (American National Standards Institute) pipe and pipe fittings. Meanwhile, STEPlib continued its existence, mainly driven by some members of USPI. Since it was clear that it was not in the interest of the industry to have two libraries for, in essence, the same set of classes, the Management Board of EPISTLE decided that the core classes of the two libraries shall be merged into Part 4 of ISO 15926. This merging process has been finished. Part 4 should act as reference data for part 2 of ISO 15926 as well as for ISO 10303-221 and replaced its Annex M. On June 5, 2007 ISO 15926-4 was signed off as a TS (Technical Specification). In 1999 the work on an earlier version of Part 7 started. Initially this was based on XML Schema (the only useful W3C Recommendation available then), but when Web Ontology Language (OWL) became available it was clear that provided a far more suitable environment for Part 7. Part 7 passed the first ISO ballot by the end of 2005, and an implementation project started. A formal ballot for TS (Technical Specification) was planned for December 2007. However, it was decided then to split Part 7 into more than one part, because the scope was too wide. == Need for ISO15926 == In 2004, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) released a report on the impact of the lack of digital interoperability in the capital projects industry. The report estimated the cost of inadequate interoperability in the U.S. capital facilities industry to be $15.8 billion per year. This was considered likely to be a conservative figure. == The standard == ISO 15926 has thirteen parts (as of February 2022): Part 1 - Overview and fundamental principles Part 2 - Data model Part 3 - Reference data for geometry and topology Part 4 - Reference Data, the terms used within facilities for the process industry Part 6 - Methodology for the development and validation of reference data (under development) Part 7 - Template methodology Part 8 - OWL/RDF implementation Part 9 - Implementation standards, with the focus on standard web servers, web services, and security (under development) Part 10 - Conformance testing Part 11 - Methodology for simplified industrial usage of reference data (under development) Part 12 - Life cycle integration ontology in Web Ontology Language (OWL2) Part 13 - Integrated lifecycle asset planning === Description === The model and the library are suitable for representing lifecycle information about technical installations and their components. They can also be used for defining the terms used in product catalogs in e-commerce. Another, more limited, use of the standard is as a reference classification for harmonization purposes between shared databases and product catalogues that are not based on ISO 15926. The purpose of ISO 15926 is to provide a Lingua Franca for computer systems, thereby integrating the information produced by them. Although set up for the process industries with large projects involving many parties, and involving plant operations and maintenance lasting decades, the technology can be used by anyone willing to set up a proper vocabulary of reference data in line with Part 4. In Part 7 the concept of Templates is introduced. These are semantic constructs, using Part 2 entities, that represent a small piece of information. These constructs then are mapped to more efficient classes of n-ary relations that interlink the Nodes that are involved in the represented information. In Part 8 the Part 7 Templates are defined in OWL and instantiated in RDF. For validation and reasoning purposes all are represented in First-Order Logic as well. In Part 9 these Node and Template instances are stored in an RDF triple store, set up to a standard schema and an API. Each participating computer system maps its data from its internal format to such ISO-standard Node and Template instances. Data can be "handed over" from one triple store to another in cases where data custodianship is handed over (e.g. from a contractor to a plant owner, or from a manufacturer to the owners of the manufactured goods). Hand-over can be for a part of all data, whilst maintaining full referential integrity. Documents are user-definable. They are defined in XML Schema and they are, in essence, only a structure containing cells that make reference to instances of Templates. This represents a view on all lifecycle data: since the data model is a 4D (space-time) model, it is possible to present the data that was valid at any given point in time, thus providing a true historical record. It is expected that this will be used for Knowledge Mining. Data can be queried by means of SPARQL. In any implementation a restricted number of triple stores can be involved, with different access rights. This is done by means of creating a CPF Server (= Confederation of Participating Façades). An Ontology Browser allows for access to one or more triple stores in a given CPF, depending on the access rights. == Projects and applications == There are a number of projects working on the extension of the ISO 15926 standard in different application areas. === Capital-intensive projects === Within the application of Capital Intensive projects, some cooperating implementation projects are running: The DEXPI project: The objective of DEXPI is to develop and promote a general standard for the process industry covering all phases of the lifecycle of a (petro-)chemical plant, ranging from specification of functional requirements to assets in operation. Finalised projects include: The EDRC Project of FIATECH Capturing Equipment Data Requirements Using ISO 15926 and Assessing Conforma