From OntologPSMW

Jump to: navigation, search
[ ]
    (1)
Session Contexts for Integration and Interoperability
Duration 1.5 hour90 minute
5,400 second
0.0625 day
Date/Time Mar 21 2018 16:00 GMT
9:00am PDT/12:00pm EDT
4:00pm GMT/5:00pm CET
Convener CoryCasanave and RaviSharma

Contents

Ontology Summit 2018 Contexts for Integration and Interoperability Session 2     (2)

Agenda     (2A)

Data/Entity Representation in Different Contexts and Frames of Reference     (2A2)

This presentation provides a brief overview of data as a representation of reality as seen by different people, systems, institutions, etc., in their respective contexts and from their perspectives. It also discusses context-shifting events and how they create interoperability challenges. Lastly if offers up some thoughts on the importance of being aware of context assumptions and being explicit about them when feasible.     (2A3)

FIBO and Cesium     (2A5)

Nobody ever wants to be the first to deploy a new technology in any particular industry, even though successful new technologies can provide a competitive edge to the early movers. But since most technology innovations fail, there is a strong deterrent to trying something new. This is the case with semantic web solutions, in particular linked data and ontologies, in Finance.     (2A6)

But the first move has already happened. This talk is about a successful deployment of semantic web technology in a major investment bank, that has been operating in production for a few years. The use case is a classic one for enterprise integration; that of sustainable extensibility - we have to build an enterprise data system that can be extended, but in a sustainable way, so that extensions don't cost more just because more time has passed.     (2A7)

We describe the system in detail, and then compare it to FIBO, a modern effort to build a standard reference ontology for the finance industry. What could the deployment from three years ago have learned from FIBO if it had existed at the time? What can FIBO learn from a successful, long-term deployment?     (2A8)

We will examine both projects in detail and explore these relationships.     (2A9)

Conference Call Information     (2B)

    • Instructions: once you got access to the page, click on the "settings" button, and identify yourself (by modifying the Name field from "anonymous" to your real name, like "JaneDoe").     (2B5A)
    • You can indicate that you want to ask a question verbally by clicking on the "hand" button, and wait for the moderator to call on you; or, type and send your question into the chat window at the bottom of the screen.     (2B5B)
  • This session, like all other Ontolog events, is open to the public. Information relating to this session is shared on this wiki page.     (2B6)
  • Please note that this session may be recorded, and if so, the audio archive is expected to be made available as open content, along with the proceedings of the call to our community membership and the public at-large under our prevailing open IPR policy.     (2B7)

Attendees     (2C)

Proceedings     (2D)

[12:22] RaviSharma: @Hans - Dynamic events, how well the shifting contexts are being handled such as live civilian and air force airspace?     (2D1)

[12:25] ToddSchneider: Among context shifts are those that occur during systems development. As a project 'moves' through different groups involved in the life-cycle.     (2D2)

[12:26] RaviSharma: @Hans - your slide 7 kind of shows it and answers my question, except for some thoughts about implementation examples, thanks.     (2D3)

[12:27] RaviSharma: @Dean - Welcome to our Summit session on Context and interoperability.     (2D4)

[12:32] RaviSharma: @Hans - good suggestion on WSDL, why not use WSDL itself? or extension.     (2D5)

[12:34] ToddSchneider: How could scope be succinctly defined?     (2D6)

[12:43] RaviSharma: @Dean - does the application subset the reference data based on permissions and privacy, implying changing context for different apps, even though the client object or entity with attributes is a single one but represented or instantiated in each context?     (2D7)

[12:49] RaviSharma: @Dean others - how extensively is RDFS being used currently for recent developing ontologies and in which domains, thanks for writing a nice book that I have read in past.     (2D8)

[12:56] ToddSchneider: Business Time??     (2D9)

[12:57] RaviSharma: @Dean - Provenance is being also annotated for who viewed the data and timestamped for when, as is now required for HIPPA going forward?     (2D10)

[12:57] Cory Casanave: Dean, are temporal concerns/context at the "fact" level or the ontology level?     (2D11)

[12:58] ToddSchneider: To what extent are the contexts of the various integrated systems represented or accommodated (in the integrating ontology)?     (2D12)

[13:00] RaviSharma: @Dean - thanks for pointing that FIBO was needed after 2008 market downfall in housing and financial context, etc.     (2D13)

[13:00] ToddSchneider: Dean, in the case of Cesium and the systems that had to be integrated, was there significant differences in the contexts of these systems?     (2D14)

[13:02] TerryLongstreth: @Dean - you use the word ontology for what I would call a data or metadata dictionary. Are the conceptual bases for elements and aggregates described/associated with the RDF items themselves, and could they be used to allow machine interpretation of intent?     (2D15)

[13:06] RaviSharma: @Dean - What is the relationship or association between Master Data Management and Ontology view of entities such as client in ontology representation is there a method for unique or unambiguous mapping between them, one you mentioned is vocabulary?     (2D16)

[13:08] ToddSchneider: So in banking there are not significant differences in contexts among banking organizations?     (2D17)

[13:12] RaviSharma: @Dean - need comments from you on context and interoperability.     (2D18)

[13:15] RaviSharma: Hans said notion of scale in functional operational, geo or human state scopes.     (2D19)

[13:16] RaviSharma: Hans said scope is related to domain for example international support for FIBO and Cesium.     (2D20)

[13:16] RaviSharma: these were Qs from Todd.     (2D21)

[13:16] Andrea Westerinen: Sorry, have to go. Thanks for the interesting talks.     (2D22)

[13:17] RaviSharma: Todd said Doug Lenat definition Hans said infinite scope is infinite cost!     (2D23)

[13:26] ToddSchneider: Dean, was any upper/Foundational ontology used in creating the ontologies for Cesium?     (2D24)

[13:26] RaviSharma: Dean said Diff between diff systems define commonality and difference, when a mix happens to cause problems, RDF has commonality, Cesium used     (2D25)

[13:30] MikeBennett: FIBO Scope is set out in the OMG documentation for the FIBO standard(s). Previously we stated scope in terms of coverage of existing financial message and data standards. Also e.g. Business Entities scope stated formally as coverage of a UN report on money laundering     (2D26)

[13:32] RaviSharma: Many thanks to participants and specially the speakers for enlightening experience     (2D27)

[13:32] RaviSharma: Ken thanks     (2D28)

Resources     (2E)

Previous Meetings     (2F)


Next Meetings     (2G)