Actions

ConferenceCall 2015 03 05 and IAOA SWAO SIG-confcall n 17: Difference between pages

Ontolog Forum

(Difference between pages)
imported>KennethBaclawski
(Fix PurpleMediaWiki references)
 
imported>KennethBaclawski
(Fix PurpleMediaWiki references)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::17]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1.5 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::Mar 02 2015 15:00 GMT]]
|-
| 7:00 PST/10:00 EST
|-
| 3:00pm BST/4:00pm CET
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett]]
|}


= [[OntologySummit2015]] Track B: Beyond Semantic Sensor Network Ontologies-II - Thu 2015-03-05  =
'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''


* Summit Theme: '''[[OntologySummit2015]]: Internet of Things: Toward Smart Networked Systems and Societies'''
Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.


* Session Topic: '''[[OntologySummit2015]] Beyond Semantic Sensor Network Ontologies'''
[[ConnectionDetails]]
 
* Session Co-chairs: [[GaryBergCross|Gary Berg-Cross]] and [[TorstenHahmann|Torsten Hahmann]]
 
== Introduction ==
Sensors are the front end of and play a big part of IoT.  Sensor-generated data have Big Data challenges like heterogeneity etc.
Because misunderstanding the data can result in invalid or misrepresented analyses semantic technologies, such as the Semantic Sensor Network ontology (SSN) ontology and associated reasoning, represent a seed area for the IoT.
We think this is a source of useful work relevant to IoT and an opportunity for good semantic development.
The Sensor network focus and efforts to go beyond the original model allows discussion of some the major challenges in utilizing semantic technologies for the IoT.
For example there is the issue of data processing after sensing is completed and networking and data processing needs to be coordinated. There is consideration on non-sensing devices such as actuators and concentrators.
And there is the inherent IoT heterogeneity issue with its multiple Techs, Standards, & different Information types.


== Agenda ==
== Agenda ==


Speakers
This week we will focus on actions for an issue of the Journal of Applied Ontology. The remaining housekeeping actions are in flight and we will consider whether to meet again in 2 weeks specifically on those matters, leaving the First Monday meeting free for longer term actions and activities.  
* Charles Vardeman, II: Computational Observations Hackathon idea
** One of the potential foundational pieces of the Internet of Things (IoT) is the work done by the W3C Incubator Group on semantic sensor networks. A core component that was resultant of the groups work was the Sensor Stimulus Observation Ontology Design Pattern that captures the concept of observation in a quantifiable and qualifiable representation including the provenance necessary to understand the context of an observation. The DASPOS project in collaboration with a group from the SoCOP DC Geovocamp 2014 (http://vocamp.org/wiki/GeoVoCampSOCoP2014) have started development of an analogous Ontology Design Pattern for Computational Observations where the observation is the result of some computational model. As part of the Ontology Summit, we are looking for feedback on the model with respect to potential applications to the IoT.
* Ingo Simonis: OGC Sensor Web & Semantics
** The OGC Sensor Web Enablement initiative started in 2001 with the goal to make sensors and sensor data connected to the Internet available at well defined interfaces using standardized information models and serializations. For over a decade,  attempts to add Semantic Web technologies and techniques failed to break into the market. Just the latest developments around JSON-LD with additional pushes coming from the Internet of Things domain seem to become more successful.
* Konstantinos Kostis: Managing unknown IoT entities by uncovering and aligning their semantics
** The talk will focus on research work at VTT (semantic interoperability in IoT) and also in current and future plans related to semantic interoperability for Cyber-Physical big data-intensive systems.
* Jean-Paul Calbimonte: Ontology-based Access to Sensor Data Stream
** Sensor networks are increasingly becoming one of the main sources of Big Data on the Web. However, the observations that they produce are made available using heterogeneous schemas, vocabularies and data formats, making it difficult to share and reuse these data for other purposes than those for which they were originally set up. In this thesis we address these challenges, considering how we can transform streaming raw data to rich ontology-based information that is accessible through continuous queries for streaming data. Our main contribution is an ontology-based approach for providing data access and query capabilities to streaming data sources, allowing users to express their needs at a conceptual level, independent of implementation and language-specific details.
* Torsten Hahmann, Silvia Nittel: Understanding Group Activities from Movement Sensor Data
** We will present ongoing work on utilizing narrow application ontologies to inject semantics into sensor data, helping us to identify and describe human-comprehensible concepts from sensor data. This is demonstrated using trajectory information about people moving between rooms in buildings for identifying group activities such as different kinds of meetings.
* Barry Smith: Ontology of Sensors: Some Examples from Biology
** I will sketch how two ontologies, the Ontology for General Medical Science ([https://code.google.com/p/ogms/ OGMS]) and the Ontology for Biomedical Investigations ([http://obi-ontology.org/page/Main_Page OBI]), represent the roles played by biotic and abiotic sensors in biomedical research.


== Resources ==
=== Agenda Details ===
* Prepared presentation material (slides) can be accessed by clicking on each of these links:  [http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2015/2015-03-05_OntologySummit2015_Beyond-Semantic-Sensor-Network-Ontologies-2/Track-B_OntologySummit2015_CharlesVardemann_2015-03-05.pdf Charles Vardemann], [http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2015/2015-03-05_OntologySummit2015_Beyond-Semantic-Sensor-Network-Ontologies-2/Track-B_OntologySummit2015_KonstantinosKotis_2015-03-05.pdf Konstantinos Kotis], [http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2015/2015-03-05_OntologySummit2015_Beyond-Semantic-Sensor-Network-Ontologies-2/Track-B_OntologySummit2015_IngoSimonis_2015-03-05.pdf Ingo Simonis], [http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2015/2015-03-05_OntologySummit2015_Beyond-Semantic-Sensor-Network-Ontologies-2/Track-B_OntologySummit2015_JeanPaulCalbimonte_2015-03-05.pdf Jean-Paul Calbimonte], [http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2015/2015-03-05_OntologySummit2015_Beyond-Semantic-Sensor-Network-Ontologies-2/Track-B_OntologySummit2015_HahmannNittel_2015-03-05.pdf Torsten Hahmann & Silvia Nittel], [http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2015/2015-03-05_OntologySummit2015_Beyond-Semantic-Sensor-Network-Ontologies-2/Track-B_OntologySummit2015_BarrySmith_2015-03-05.pdf Barry Smith]
* Additional Resources: [http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2015/2015-03-05_OntologySummit2015_Beyond-Semantic-Sensor-Network-Ontologies-2/Track-B_Beyond-Semantic-Sensor-Network-Ontologies_OntologySummit2015_audio_20150305.mp3 Audio Recording]


== [[MeetingsCalls|Conference Call]] Details  ==
* Issue of the Journal of Applied Ontology
** Status update - we now have the details for this
** Next actions
** This will be the main focus of today's meeting.


* Date: '''Thursday, 05-Mar-2015'''
* AOB
* Start Time: 9:30am PST / 12:30pm EST / 6:30pm CEST / 5:30pm BST / 1730 UTC
** ref: [http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=03&day=05&year=2015&hour=12&min=30&sec=0&p1=179 World Clock]
* Expected Call Duration: ~2.0 hours


* Dial-in:
* Next Meeting
** '''Phone (US): +1 (425) 440-5100''' ...  (long distance cost may apply) 
*** ... [ backup nbr: (315) 401-3279 ]
*** when prompted enter '''Conference ID: 843758#'''
** '''Skype: join.conference''' (i.e. make a skype call to the contact with skypeID="join.conference") ...  (generally free-of-charge, when connecting from your computer ... [[VirtualSpeakerSessionTips|ref.]]) 
*** when prompted enter '''Conference ID: 843758#'''
*** Unfamiliar with how to do this on Skype? ...
**** Add the contact "join.conference" to your skype contact list first. To participate in the teleconference, make a skype call to "join.conference", then open the dial pad (see platform-specific instructions below) and enter the '''Conference ID: 843758#''' when prompted.
*** Can't find Skype Dial pad? ...
**** for Windows Skype users: Can't find Skype Dial pad? ... it's under the "Call" dropdown menu as "Show Dial pad"
**** for Linux Skype users: please note that the dial-pad is only available on v4.1 (or later; or on the earlier Skype versions 2.x,) if the dialpad button is not shown in the call window you need to press the "d" hotkey to enable it. ...  ([[VirtualSpeakerSessionTips|ref.]]) 


* '''In-session chat'''-room url: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/summit_20150305
== Attendees ==
** 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]]").
[[FrankLoebe]]
** 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.
[[User:KennethBaclawski|Ken Baclawski]]
** thanks to the soaphub.org folks, one can now use a jabber/xmpp client (e.g. gtalk) to join this chatroom. Just add the room as a buddy - (in our case here) summit_20150305@soaphub.org ... Handy for mobile devices!
[[LeoObrst]]
 
[[MikeBennett]]
* '''Discussions and Q & A:'''
** Nominally, when a presentation is in progress, the moderator will mute everyone, except for the speaker.
** '''To un-mute, press "*7"''' ... '''To mute, press "*6"''' (please mute your phone, especially if you are in a noisy surrounding, or if you are introducing noise, echoes, etc. into the conference line.)
** we will usually save all questions and discussions till after all presentations are through. You are encouraged to jot down questions onto the chat-area in the mean time (that way, they get documented; and you might even get some answers in the interim, through the chat.)
** During the Q&A / discussion segment (when everyone is muted), '''If you want to speak''' or have questions or remarks to make, '''please raise your hand''' (virtually) '''by clicking on the "hand button"''' (lower right) on the chat session page. You may speak when acknowledged by the session moderator (again, press "*7" on your phone to un-mute). ''Test your voice and introduce yourself first before proceeding with your remarks, please.'' (Please remember to click on the "hand button" again (to lower your hand) and press "*6" on your phone to mute yourself after you are done speaking.)


* Please review our Virtual Session Tips and Ground Rules - see: [[VirtualSpeakerSessionTips]]  
== Proceedings ==
[07:00] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Apologies: Naicong Li, Elie Abi-Lahoud


* '''RSVP''' '' to [mailto:gbergcross@gmail.com gbergcross@gmail.com] with your affiliation appreciated,'' ... or simply just by adding yourself to the "Expected Attendee" list below (if you are a member of the community already.)
[07:09] [[FrankLoebe|Frank Loebe]]: MB: proposal to move administrative issues to separate meetings in 2 weeks time, focus today on the agenda as stated


* This session, like all other Ontolog events, is open to the public. Information relating to this session is shared on this wiki page: http://ontolog-02.cim3.net/wiki/ConferenceCall_2015_03_05
[07:10] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Focus is the stuff from the 2014 Ontology Summit


* 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 [[WikiHomePage#Intellectual_Property_Rights_.28IPR.29_Policy|our prevailing open IPR policy]].
[07:11] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: What are the milestones in this process?


== Chat Transcript ==
[07:11] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: For example when to put out a call for contributions, how long to give authors to produce something.


[09:16] Mark Underwood: Slide decks for today's session downloadable from "Prepared Presentation Material" on
[07:12] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We have a call for papers
http://ontolog-02.cim3.net/wiki/ConferenceCall_2015_03_05


[09:17] Gary Berg-Cross: Hello Chuck!!
[07:12] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: This has been distributed within our mailing list.


[09:17] Charles Vardeman: Greetings!
[07:12] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: This needs to be updated with the dates.


[09:26] [[PeterYim|Peter P. Yim]]: Hi everyone!
[07:12] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Decisions needed:


[09:28] [[MichaelGruninger|Michael Grüninger]]: I won't be able to participate during the session, but I will be starting and ending a recording of the session
[07:12] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: 1. Lead time for authors


[09:39] Konstantinos: Hi Gary, all
[07:13] [[User:KennethBaclawski|Ken Baclawski]]:
CFP: IAOA Journal of Applied Ontology Special Issue on the Role of Ontologies in Linked Data, Big Data and Semantic Web Applications


[09:40] Gary Berg-Cross: Welcome Konstantinos. You are scheduled as our 3rd speaker.
The IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) Special Interest Group [ontolog-02.cim3.net] welcomes the submission of papers (minimum of xx pages) discussing
the role of ontologies in the areas of Linked Data, Big Data and the Semantic Web. Our goal is to collect a diverse set of practical, methodological and
research-oriented papers concerned with the use of ontologies in support of these areas, with a focus on content-specific integration and modelling issues.
Expanding on the topics highlighted in the Ontology Summit 2014 Communique [ontolog.cim3.net], submissions should be concerned with:


[09:46] [[PeterYim|Peter P. Yim]]: @Konstantinos - please see: http://ontolog-02.cim3.net/w/index.php?title=ConferenceCall_2015_03_05&oldid=15537#hid1G4B3
* The role that ontologies play (or can play) in Linked Data, Big Data and Semantic Web Applications
* Engineering of ontologies to address integration and domain-specific modeling issues
* Sharing and reuse of ontologies within and across application or domain areas
* Automation and tooling in support of ontology development


[09:46] Torsten Hahmann: In my Skype version (6.2) there is a big "Plus symbol" right next to the red "hang up" symbol to add the dialpad. It is only visible
Papers should be formatted and submitted according to the guidelines of the IAOA Journal of Applied Ontology [www.iaoa.org]. The guidelines are found under
when the call is in progress.
the tab, "Manuscript submissions & Author instructions".


[09:48] [[TaraAthan|Tara Athan]]: A critical component of the description of a computational model about the real world are the regime of validity, which could be expressed
--------------- Important dates ---------------
either negatively (the model is not valid if the temperature is less than X) or positively (the model assumes the material is at thermal equilibrium). I have
* xxx, 2015: Submission Deadline
long hoped that very expressive KR languages (e.g. Common Logic) could be used to capture this "metadata".
* xxx, 2015: Notification to Authors
* xxx, 2015: Camera-ready Due


[09:50] Konstantinos: I am in! Thanks a lot
[07:14] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: 2. Minimum number of pages


[09:51] Charles Vardeman: @TaraAthan Yes that is my hope. One of the inspirations for the pattern was my experience in working with students who were doing
[07:15] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We can also use material from the workshop we proposed last year, which we can feed in to this.
simulations that probably were not valid given their choice of input parameters (temperature is less than X and the model was not parameterized for those
conditions).


[09:52] Gary Berg-Cross: @Konstantinos Great. You will be the next speaker. We didn't have chance to test your mike so we will try that first and let you
[07:16] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Does the Journal require us to specify a minimum number of pages?
know if we can hear you.


[09:54] [[TaraAthan|Tara Athan]]: @Charles Do you have a particular approach in mind for capturing model regime of validity or assumptions?
[07:16] [[FrankLoebe|Frank Loebe]]: Applied Ontology does not, I think


[09:54] Gary Berg-Cross: Welcome Barry. You are our last speaker which should be around 2.
[07:16] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: The Workshop proposal had long + short papers, up to 10 pages. Do we want to impose that limit here.


[09:57] [[JoshLieberman|Josh Lieberman]]: so UML in slide 9 should be GML ?
[07:17] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Put a suggested upper limit.


[09:58] Gary Berg-Cross: Simon Cox presented last year, or so, on this O & M work as part of an Ontolog series on Earth Science. You can get his slides
[07:17] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Can tolerate shorter papers e.g. position papers.
there.


[09:59] Charles Vardeman: @TaraAthan I have some rough thoughts based on some toy models (inclined plane) and some work that we did at a recent RDA workshop.
[07:18] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: NB Position papers must be content-full, not "conversation starters" as one might have in a workshop.
We were playing with using value restrictions based on the model and the algorithm. The issue is that there are sets of conceptual and mathematical
assumptions built into the computational model as well as assumptions that are built into the algorithmic implementation. One of the issues we need to
explore is the relationship between what we call parameter type (algorithm) and AttributeType which is a property of the model.


[09:59] [[JoshLieberman|Josh Lieberman]]: Familiar with Simon's work, just not the point being made by Ingo.
[07:18] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Given we don't know how many papers to expect, it might be useful to allow longer papers anyway.


[10:06] [[TaraAthan|Tara Athan]]: @charles - one issue with value restrictions has to do with what is the required accuracy of the results. Supposing "h" represents a
[07:19] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We can check with Oliver what his experience has been with previous such issues.
neglected effect, and the error due to neglecting it is bounded by some k * h^n, it could be possible to derive the value restrictions based on the users
accuracy requirements.


[10:06] Mark Underwood: Listeners can download @Konstantinos deck at http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2015/2015-03-05_OntologySummit2015_Beyond-Semantic-Sensor-Network-Ontologies-2/Track-B_OntologySummit2015_KonstantinosKotis_2015-03-05.pdf
[07:19] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Indicative number of pages rather than a hard limit, e.g. "10 to 12 pages"?


[10:12] [[TaraAthan|Tara Athan]]: Does anyone have a link for RDF streams?
[07:19] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Journal pages tend to be longer than conference / workshop papers anyway.


[10:13] Mark Underwood: @Tara - Not sure. . . The W3C group is https://www.w3.org/community/rsp/
[07:20] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Also compare with other recent calls, see e.g. the Semantic Web journal.


[10:15] Charles Vardeman: @TaraAthan I agree. We know in many cases how the errors associated with a model are propagated by the algorithm. As I alluded to,
[07:20] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Make sure that our call does not run in parallel with existing calls such as the above.
I think the computational model sub-pattern may have patterns that capture error associated with a model associating that the model has been captured to
sufficient fidelity. I also have a notion that the model could also just be an information object that points to a publication that captures the model which
would still be useful.


[10:18] Liana Kiff: What are the performance characteristics of retrieving and processing RDF streams?
[07:20] [[FrankLoebe|Frank Loebe]]: [action] [FL] find recent call for similar special issue
[07:21] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Semantic Web journal website shows 4 deadlines but 3 are over. Open one is March 31.


[10:18] [[TaraAthan|Tara Athan]]: The theory of monads (from category theory and functional programming) may be useful in dealing with streams of axioms such as RDF
[07:22] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Categories...
streams, since Stream is a particular kind of monad.


[10:18] Gary Berg-Cross: @jean-Paul People might like some references on the work that you cite.
[07:23] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Example call on SW journal ran from July to March. Only the submission deadline was given.


[10:23] Mark Underwood: @Jean-Paul - Should one hold out hope for interop with CEP standards to add event, query models?
[07:24] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Another example went from July to end of December (and already extended). = 6 months.


[10:24] [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]]: @Jean-Paul - great especially CEP. Do you or can you use timestamp on data for streaming? Also very useful for CEP? How does it relate to
[07:25] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Decisions on length:
SBVR and time and calendaring efforts including OMGs?


[10:25] Gary Berg-Cross: @Jean-Paul Does the mapping from data to stream create an identity issue? If the data form has an ID does the stream have a new ID
[07:25] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: 1. We should say the typical length
but point back to the original ID?


[10:27] [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]]: @Tara please send me references as well.
[07:25] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We should also say that papers up to 30 pages is also acceptable (make it clear people can send longer papers)


[10:35] [[SteveRay|Steve Ray]]: Wolfram Research has made a good start at a semantic registry of IoT devices at http://devices.wolfram.com/
[07:26] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: What number of papers would typically be sufficient for one edition of the Journal?


[10:39] [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]]: @Konstantin - Source of data if on Internet or referenced to Internet is equivalent to big data but big data need not have IoT
[07:26] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We should also consider inviting people from other communities to write position paper.
relationship? Let us know why the two are same?


[10:44] Konstantinos: @SteveRay that is cool, thanks
[07:27] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: For this particular agenda, variety is key.


[10:46] Dennis Wisnosky: did she say woof woof
[07:28] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Position papers are also very welcome, given we are carving out questions about what kinds of ontology modeling are appropriate for the
different communities of Linked Data, Applied Ontology, Semantic Web, Big Data and so on.


[10:47] [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]]: @Nittel - we need to distinguish between entities related to physical objects and then you say dinner, it is a plate with things and also
[07:28] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We should approach people who we think might have something to contribute.
a process? How do we deal this - in prior Knowledge Base?


[10:48] [[TaraAthan|Tara Athan]]: Re Streams and Monads: https://patternsinfp.wordpress.com/2010/12/31/stream-monad/
[07:29] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Suggestion: First deadline of 3 month, where we ask for position papers. Then consider longer papers on a 6 month time line.


[10:49] [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]]: Sorry I meant Silvia Nittel
[07:30] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Position papers don't need to long to do.


[10:53] Mark Underwood: @Dennis That's how my parser heard it, unless it was a hidden reference to a highly supportive collaborator
[07:30] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: So we would ask for position papers later.


[10:54] Dennis Wisnosky1: My favorite collaborator talks that language.
[07:31] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: So then we could approach people for possible position papers later, targeting people who might have something interesting or
challenging to say.


[10:55] [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]]: @Torsten, we have webinars as a category?
[07:33] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Notification - decide how long we need.


[10:56] [[JoshLieberman|Josh Lieberman]]: So the activity characterizations come from a combination of prior reasoning and machine learning classification of signals...
[07:34] [[FrankLoebe|Frank Loebe]]: LO: We should target speakers and panelists of the 2014 Ontology Summit


[10:57] SIlvia Nittel: yes, we say there has to be some sensor data synthesis and fusion to come up with the "observed entity signal"
[07:34] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Camera-ready: determine based on what the publisher's lead time is.


[10:58] Torsten Hahmann: @Ravi: we should, but currently we don't ... The sensor signals underlying the trajectory data has no video/audio - so there are
[07:35] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Introductory comment: by the editors of the Special Issue, that introduces the papers. This can also provide some general comment /
only limited things we can infer from it. But one could envision adding a "video conference sensor" to take care of this
scene setting, and the history.


[10:59] [[ChristiKapp|Christi Kapp]]: @Torsten Are you looking at using any statistical clustering algorithms to interpret the event data and correlate location events into
[07:35] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Review model:
meetings?


[11:00] Torsten Hahmann: @Christi: Not right now - we hope to get by with logical axioms/assertions right now. But we are thinking about using statistics to
[07:36] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We would need to assemble an editorial team that would do the reviews.
describe different kinds of meeting in more detail (after classification)


[11:02] [[PeterYim|Peter P. Yim]]: Do the activity descriptions come from an existing ontology? If the events, and the sensor data
[07:37] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Usual process is that some Lead Editor (handling editor) assumes responsibility for the incoming submissions, then designates various
descriptions come from the same ontology (something comprehensive, as one extracted from Wikipedia), there are no alignment problems. ... (please identify
people to review the papers.
yourself, and post to the field on the left of the "send button")


[11:02] [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]]: @Barry - how mature are ontology interfaces or use from domain to mid level such as healthcare?
[07:37] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Expect 1 month (this is fast) or 2 month review time (more usual in practice)


[11:02] Gary Berg-Cross: Q from audience Do the activity descriptions come from an existing ontology? If the events, and the sensor data descriptions come
[07:37] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Accept v Reject: there is also "Accept with Changes" - leading up to the Camera-ready date.
from the same ontology (something comprehensive, as one extracted from Wikipedia), there are no alignment problems.


[11:07] Mark Underwood: Is he lexicalizing "biotic" ?
[07:38] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: How long should we give people to re-work their paper after comments?


[11:12] [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]]: @Barry - how would you categorize Phantom sensation (pain) and squeezed nerves that prevent sensing of downstream pain, even though there
[07:39] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Communication: Leo has had some communication with Nicola, and Andrea has had some comms with Michael Gruninger who has also spoken to
are secondary nerve networks? I am hinting at correlation between primary and backup sensing? depiction in ontology?
Nicola.


[11:17] Jean-Paul Calbimonte: @Barry: for references, please refer to the RDF Stream processing group wiki, we have lots of resources there:
[07:40] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Action: Set up a team - including guest editor(s) taking on the role of handling editor.
https://www.w3.org/community/rsp/wiki/Main_Page


[11:17] Jean-Paul Calbimonte: sorry, meant @Gary
[07:40] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Typically: 2 main editors in charge of the issue, ad the reviewer / editorials board we provide.


[11:18] Jean-Paul Calbimonte: @Mark: yes CEP interop is key. In fact some of the systems I mentioned already do. For example EP-SPARQL. or Our SPARQL stream
[07:41] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Recruiting reviewers: we can ask folks from this group, but also people we know from different areas. Including external folks.
approach, can use a CEP such as Esper behind the scenes


[11:19] Jean-Paul Calbimonte: @Ravi: yes, one way is to add timestamps to triples. But we found lately that it might be better to create RDF graphs and
[07:41] [[FrankLoebe|Frank Loebe]]: + incl. usual AO editorial board members
annotate them with timestamps


[11:20] [[ToddSchneider|Todd Schneider]]: Josh, is the 'secondary' signal just another measurement(process)?
[07:42] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: For this issue in particular, it's important we are seen to have reviews from a broad cross section of the target communities / reviews
by the appropriate community.


[11:20] [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]]: @Barry - thanks for answers.
[07:42] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Also there may be newer aspects of our topic that we would want to call out.


[11:20] Jean-Paul Calbimonte: @Gary: the mappings should provide these new URIs you mention. What we think is that PROV relationships should be used to link
[07:43] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Can we aim for March?
the original streams with the derived ones. But this should be formalized


[11:21] Gary Berg-Cross: @Jean-Paul Thanks for this connection to Prov and the references.
[07:44] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Before we finalize this we should also run it by someone who has previously done a special issue.


[11:22] [[ToddSchneider|Todd Schneider]]: Barry, can the use of statistical analyzes be represented as processes?
[07:45] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Official feedback from Nicola and Mark Musen.


[11:22] [[ToddSchneider|Todd Schneider]]: Barry, can statistical analyzes be represented as processes?
[07:45] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Secondary feedback from people who have done special issues, both for AO and others like SW Journal.


[11:22] [[JoshLieberman|Josh Lieberman]]: Unanticipated relationship between a previously configured signal and a new measurement
[07:45] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Also get a sense of what sort of responses they got and so on.


[11:26] Konstantinos: I really need to leave the chat now, please forward any questions at kotis@aegean.gr and I will be glad to answer. Thank you for
[07:45] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Can we put a stake in the ground on some of these figures, to prime those questions?
listening.


[11:26] Mark Underwood: Thanks for presenting, Konstantinos
[07:46] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: This needs to happen in the next few days.


[11:26] Gary Berg-Cross: @Konstantinos thanks very much for an interesting talk and for staying up late...
[07:46] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We already have the template for the CfP (see above).


[11:26] Konstantinos: Thank you for your attention!
[07:46] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: When we have some feedback we can with finalize via email or meet again as needed.


[11:26] Konstantinos: and support!
[07:47] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Then target the list and the individuals we want to send it to.


[11:27] [[LeoObrst|Leo Obrst]]: @SilviaNittel: we do model meetings as events in our ontologies because we need such. They can be complex, with many participants in
[07:47] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Action: put together a list of people from last years' Summit.
different roles, and with predecessor and successor events and states.


[11:28] [[ToddSchneider|Todd Schneider]]: Ravi, what about the physical manifestation(s) of a process?
[07:47] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We also have a distribution list from the 2014 Ontology Summit that we can use.


[11:31] Mark Underwood: John - possible topic for the F2F meeting
[07:48] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Provisional figures:


[11:32] [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]]: @Todd - winds cause loss of houses in tornadoes? so cause effect relations but often as Barry explained process is effect of entities of
[07:48] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: 1. Provisional duration for review process
first kind.


[11:32] Mark Underwood: Rich set of presentations - Thanks to all the presenters
[07:49] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: 2. Provisional duration for authors to turn around comments, and reviewers re-review them (1 month?)


[11:32] [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]]: thanks
[07:50] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Pre-preparation - we can approach people and get them to send a short abstract, thereby locking in their interest.


[11:33] Charles Vardeman: Thanks!
[07:50] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Let's give 2 to 3 weeks for this initial process - time for them to send in an abstract.


[11:33] Jean-Paul Calbimonte: thanks to all
[07:51] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: (again we will run this past others to see if this matches their experiences)


[11:33] [[JoshLieberman|Josh Lieberman]]: Thanks.
[07:51] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Oliver Kurtz did a couple of issues lately, and can give us some feedback.


[11:33] [[PeterYim|Peter P. Yim]]: Big THANK YOU to the co-chairs for organizing this great session. ... Thanks to each and every speaker for their well prepared and rich
[07:52] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Frank will speak to someone who did a similar thing at the SW Journal.
presentations!


[11:33] Torsten Hahmann: Thanks everyone!
[07:52] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Would also get some idea of the size and structure of the Guest Editorial Board.


[11:33] John Graybeal: Question about how these ontologies become used: Some may be intended simply for the research communities, but getting practical
[07:52] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: 2 - 5 people is typical.
ontologies adopted in operational systems seems to be a big hurdle. Do we have thoughts and/or conclusions about how to make this take place?


[11:33] Charles Vardeman: Bye!
[07:52] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: These would also be expected to act as reviewers.


[11:33] [[LeoObrst|Leo Obrst]]: Thanks, all!
[07:54] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We can run this a lot more interactively than a typical journal issue, as we would interact with the folks who participated last year,
plus ideas for new people who would have something more to say in the same topics.


[11:33] [[MarcelaVegetti|Marcela Vegetti]]: Great Session!
[07:54] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Some expressions of interest might not result in a paper - it's not a guarantee.


== Attendees ==
[07:55] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: That is, we would engage them but we might not lock them in.


Alex Mirzaoff
[07:55] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Get an abstract from them anyway.


Allyson
[07:56] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Turnaround of comments = 1 month


[[AndreaWesterinen]]
[07:57] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Review: 6 weeks or 2 months?


Barry Smith
[07:59] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Time from the submission deadline, to the "Yes, No or Yes with comments" would be 6 weeks


Bobbin Teegarden
[07:59] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: But the time we give to reviewers would be a month, so we have space for turnaround.


[[BruceBray ]]
[07:59] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Use EasyChair


Carl Neilson
[07:59] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Who assigns the reviewers to the submissions?


Charles Vardeman
[08:00] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: The assigning is done via EasyChair, one of the people on the editorial board would need to do that.


[[ChristiKapp]]
[08:00] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: For external reviewers, we would invite reviewers for Applied Ontology, give the email address, and then grant them access to the
EasyChair thing as well.


[[ChristopherSpottiswoode]]
[08:01] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: who does the assignment?


[[ConradBeaulieu]]
[08:01] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Editorial Board members would usually bid for what papers they want to review. this doesn't account for how external reviewers are
handled.


Dennis Wisnosky
[08:02] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: The structure in AO has changed since September - the Eds in Chief (Mark and Nicola), then there are also Associate Editors who are like
a handling editor. All of them see a new Ms that comes in.


[[DennisPierson]]
[08:03] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Associate editors automatically get notice that a Ms has been received, and can indicate interest, thereby becoming the handling editor
for that.


Frederic de Vaulx (NIST Associate)
[08:03] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We can query Nicola to see if the structure would be the same for the Special Issue.


Gary Berg-Cross
[08:04] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We would need to grant everyone on the Special Issue Ed Board, the same access.
 
[[IngoSimonis]]
 
Jean-Paul Calbimonte
 
[[JoeKopena]]
 
[[JoelBender]]
 
John Graybeal
 
[[JoshLieberman]]
 
Judith Gelernter
 
[[User:KennethBaclawski|Ken Baclawski]]
 
Konstantinos
 
[[LeoObrst]]


Liana Kiff
[08:04] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We need to get clarified fro Nicola about that.


Malek
[08:05] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Internally we could use EasyChair, or we might go through the hoops at IoSPress. Can use either.


[[MarcelaVegetti]]
[08:05] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Can switch to the IoS Press system for the final version.


Mark Underwood
[08:05] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Conclusion: 1 or 2 week overhead in assigning reviews, add that to the time we give the reviewers after they have agreed. That latter: 4
weeks at least.


[[MichaelGruninger]]
[08:06] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Allow for summer - if Review cycle overlaps with July or August we would allow more time for that.


Nicolas Seydoux
[08:07] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Action: Mike to plug in the numbers and circulate to the group.


[[PeterYim]]
[08:08] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Others to use this draft schedule as what they use to get feedback from the above folks who have done this.


[[RalphSchaefermeier]]
[08:08] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Next meeting: 1st Monday in April.


Ram D. Sriram
[08:08] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Therefore, if we get the call out by end of March, gives us to September for writing submissions.


[[RaviSharma]]
[08:08] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Therefore call has to be out before next regular meeting.


Richard Beatch
[08:08] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Expect to meet before the April meeting on this.


Richard Martin
[08:09] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: We could use the meeting in 2 weeks to do partly this and partly the Housekeeping.


SIlvia Nittel
[08:09] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: March 16.


[[SteveRay]]
[08:10] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: Would allow us to finalize the call the week after - aim for March 20 to be out and publicized by the end of March.


[[TaraAthan]]
[08:10] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: AOB?


[[TerryLongstreth]]
[08:10] [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: No


[[ToddSchneider]]


Tom Tinsley
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:IAOA_SWAO]] [[Category:Icom_conf_Conference]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{PAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|mainlabel=-|


Torsten Hahmann
sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}


[[Category:OntologySummit]]
[[Category:IAOA_SWAO| ]]
[[Category:OntologySummit2015]]
[[Category:Icom_conf_Conference| ]]
[[Category:Occurrence| ]]

Latest revision as of 07:02, 9 January 2016

Number 17
Duration 1.5 hour
Date/Time Mar 02 2015 15:00 GMT
7:00 PST/10:00 EST
3:00pm BST/4:00pm CET
Convener MikeBennett

IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

ConnectionDetails

Agenda

This week we will focus on actions for an issue of the Journal of Applied Ontology. The remaining housekeeping actions are in flight and we will consider whether to meet again in 2 weeks specifically on those matters, leaving the First Monday meeting free for longer term actions and activities.

Agenda Details

  • Issue of the Journal of Applied Ontology
    • Status update - we now have the details for this
    • Next actions
    • This will be the main focus of today's meeting.
  • AOB
  • Next Meeting

Attendees

FrankLoebe Ken Baclawski LeoObrst MikeBennett

Proceedings

[07:00] Mike Bennett: Apologies: Naicong Li, Elie Abi-Lahoud

[07:09] Frank Loebe: MB: proposal to move administrative issues to separate meetings in 2 weeks time, focus today on the agenda as stated

[07:10] Mike Bennett: Focus is the stuff from the 2014 Ontology Summit

[07:11] Mike Bennett: What are the milestones in this process?

[07:11] Mike Bennett: For example when to put out a call for contributions, how long to give authors to produce something.

[07:12] Mike Bennett: We have a call for papers

[07:12] Mike Bennett: This has been distributed within our mailing list.

[07:12] Mike Bennett: This needs to be updated with the dates.

[07:12] Mike Bennett: Decisions needed:

[07:12] Mike Bennett: 1. Lead time for authors

[07:13] Ken Baclawski: CFP: IAOA Journal of Applied Ontology Special Issue on the Role of Ontologies in Linked Data, Big Data and Semantic Web Applications

The IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) Special Interest Group [ontolog-02.cim3.net] welcomes the submission of papers (minimum of xx pages) discussing the role of ontologies in the areas of Linked Data, Big Data and the Semantic Web. Our goal is to collect a diverse set of practical, methodological and research-oriented papers concerned with the use of ontologies in support of these areas, with a focus on content-specific integration and modelling issues. Expanding on the topics highlighted in the Ontology Summit 2014 Communique [ontolog.cim3.net], submissions should be concerned with:

  • The role that ontologies play (or can play) in Linked Data, Big Data and Semantic Web Applications
  • Engineering of ontologies to address integration and domain-specific modeling issues
  • Sharing and reuse of ontologies within and across application or domain areas
  • Automation and tooling in support of ontology development

Papers should be formatted and submitted according to the guidelines of the IAOA Journal of Applied Ontology [www.iaoa.org]. The guidelines are found under the tab, "Manuscript submissions & Author instructions".


Important dates ---------------

  • xxx, 2015: Submission Deadline
  • xxx, 2015: Notification to Authors
  • xxx, 2015: Camera-ready Due

[07:14] Mike Bennett: 2. Minimum number of pages

[07:15] Mike Bennett: We can also use material from the workshop we proposed last year, which we can feed in to this.

[07:16] Mike Bennett: Does the Journal require us to specify a minimum number of pages?

[07:16] Frank Loebe: Applied Ontology does not, I think

[07:16] Mike Bennett: The Workshop proposal had long + short papers, up to 10 pages. Do we want to impose that limit here.

[07:17] Mike Bennett: Put a suggested upper limit.

[07:17] Mike Bennett: Can tolerate shorter papers e.g. position papers.

[07:18] Mike Bennett: NB Position papers must be content-full, not "conversation starters" as one might have in a workshop.

[07:18] Mike Bennett: Given we don't know how many papers to expect, it might be useful to allow longer papers anyway.

[07:19] Mike Bennett: We can check with Oliver what his experience has been with previous such issues.

[07:19] Mike Bennett: Indicative number of pages rather than a hard limit, e.g. "10 to 12 pages"?

[07:19] Mike Bennett: Journal pages tend to be longer than conference / workshop papers anyway.

[07:20] Mike Bennett: Also compare with other recent calls, see e.g. the Semantic Web journal.

[07:20] Mike Bennett: Make sure that our call does not run in parallel with existing calls such as the above.

[07:20] Frank Loebe: [action] [FL] find recent call for similar special issue [07:21] Mike Bennett: Semantic Web journal website shows 4 deadlines but 3 are over. Open one is March 31.

[07:22] Mike Bennett: Categories...

[07:23] Mike Bennett: Example call on SW journal ran from July to March. Only the submission deadline was given.

[07:24] Mike Bennett: Another example went from July to end of December (and already extended). = 6 months.

[07:25] Mike Bennett: Decisions on length:

[07:25] Mike Bennett: 1. We should say the typical length

[07:25] Mike Bennett: We should also say that papers up to 30 pages is also acceptable (make it clear people can send longer papers)

[07:26] Mike Bennett: What number of papers would typically be sufficient for one edition of the Journal?

[07:26] Mike Bennett: We should also consider inviting people from other communities to write position paper.

[07:27] Mike Bennett: For this particular agenda, variety is key.

[07:28] Mike Bennett: Position papers are also very welcome, given we are carving out questions about what kinds of ontology modeling are appropriate for the different communities of Linked Data, Applied Ontology, Semantic Web, Big Data and so on.

[07:28] Mike Bennett: We should approach people who we think might have something to contribute.

[07:29] Mike Bennett: Suggestion: First deadline of 3 month, where we ask for position papers. Then consider longer papers on a 6 month time line.

[07:30] Mike Bennett: Position papers don't need to long to do.

[07:30] Mike Bennett: So we would ask for position papers later.

[07:31] Mike Bennett: So then we could approach people for possible position papers later, targeting people who might have something interesting or challenging to say.

[07:33] Mike Bennett: Notification - decide how long we need.

[07:34] Frank Loebe: LO: We should target speakers and panelists of the 2014 Ontology Summit

[07:34] Mike Bennett: Camera-ready: determine based on what the publisher's lead time is.

[07:35] Mike Bennett: Introductory comment: by the editors of the Special Issue, that introduces the papers. This can also provide some general comment / scene setting, and the history.

[07:35] Mike Bennett: Review model:

[07:36] Mike Bennett: We would need to assemble an editorial team that would do the reviews.

[07:37] Mike Bennett: Usual process is that some Lead Editor (handling editor) assumes responsibility for the incoming submissions, then designates various people to review the papers.

[07:37] Mike Bennett: Expect 1 month (this is fast) or 2 month review time (more usual in practice)

[07:37] Mike Bennett: Accept v Reject: there is also "Accept with Changes" - leading up to the Camera-ready date.

[07:38] Mike Bennett: How long should we give people to re-work their paper after comments?

[07:39] Mike Bennett: Communication: Leo has had some communication with Nicola, and Andrea has had some comms with Michael Gruninger who has also spoken to Nicola.

[07:40] Mike Bennett: Action: Set up a team - including guest editor(s) taking on the role of handling editor.

[07:40] Mike Bennett: Typically: 2 main editors in charge of the issue, ad the reviewer / editorials board we provide.

[07:41] Mike Bennett: Recruiting reviewers: we can ask folks from this group, but also people we know from different areas. Including external folks.

[07:41] Frank Loebe: + incl. usual AO editorial board members

[07:42] Mike Bennett: For this issue in particular, it's important we are seen to have reviews from a broad cross section of the target communities / reviews by the appropriate community.

[07:42] Mike Bennett: Also there may be newer aspects of our topic that we would want to call out.

[07:43] Mike Bennett: Can we aim for March?

[07:44] Mike Bennett: Before we finalize this we should also run it by someone who has previously done a special issue.

[07:45] Mike Bennett: Official feedback from Nicola and Mark Musen.

[07:45] Mike Bennett: Secondary feedback from people who have done special issues, both for AO and others like SW Journal.

[07:45] Mike Bennett: Also get a sense of what sort of responses they got and so on.

[07:45] Mike Bennett: Can we put a stake in the ground on some of these figures, to prime those questions?

[07:46] Mike Bennett: This needs to happen in the next few days.

[07:46] Mike Bennett: We already have the template for the CfP (see above).

[07:46] Mike Bennett: When we have some feedback we can with finalize via email or meet again as needed.

[07:47] Mike Bennett: Then target the list and the individuals we want to send it to.

[07:47] Mike Bennett: Action: put together a list of people from last years' Summit.

[07:47] Mike Bennett: We also have a distribution list from the 2014 Ontology Summit that we can use.

[07:48] Mike Bennett: Provisional figures:

[07:48] Mike Bennett: 1. Provisional duration for review process

[07:49] Mike Bennett: 2. Provisional duration for authors to turn around comments, and reviewers re-review them (1 month?)

[07:50] Mike Bennett: Pre-preparation - we can approach people and get them to send a short abstract, thereby locking in their interest.

[07:50] Mike Bennett: Let's give 2 to 3 weeks for this initial process - time for them to send in an abstract.

[07:51] Mike Bennett: (again we will run this past others to see if this matches their experiences)

[07:51] Mike Bennett: Oliver Kurtz did a couple of issues lately, and can give us some feedback.

[07:52] Mike Bennett: Frank will speak to someone who did a similar thing at the SW Journal.

[07:52] Mike Bennett: Would also get some idea of the size and structure of the Guest Editorial Board.

[07:52] Mike Bennett: 2 - 5 people is typical.

[07:52] Mike Bennett: These would also be expected to act as reviewers.

[07:54] Mike Bennett: We can run this a lot more interactively than a typical journal issue, as we would interact with the folks who participated last year, plus ideas for new people who would have something more to say in the same topics.

[07:54] Mike Bennett: Some expressions of interest might not result in a paper - it's not a guarantee.

[07:55] Mike Bennett: That is, we would engage them but we might not lock them in.

[07:55] Mike Bennett: Get an abstract from them anyway.

[07:56] Mike Bennett: Turnaround of comments = 1 month

[07:57] Mike Bennett: Review: 6 weeks or 2 months?

[07:59] Mike Bennett: Time from the submission deadline, to the "Yes, No or Yes with comments" would be 6 weeks

[07:59] Mike Bennett: But the time we give to reviewers would be a month, so we have space for turnaround.

[07:59] Mike Bennett: Use EasyChair

[07:59] Mike Bennett: Who assigns the reviewers to the submissions?

[08:00] Mike Bennett: The assigning is done via EasyChair, one of the people on the editorial board would need to do that.

[08:00] Mike Bennett: For external reviewers, we would invite reviewers for Applied Ontology, give the email address, and then grant them access to the EasyChair thing as well.

[08:01] Mike Bennett: who does the assignment?

[08:01] Mike Bennett: Editorial Board members would usually bid for what papers they want to review. this doesn't account for how external reviewers are handled.

[08:02] Mike Bennett: The structure in AO has changed since September - the Eds in Chief (Mark and Nicola), then there are also Associate Editors who are like a handling editor. All of them see a new Ms that comes in.

[08:03] Mike Bennett: Associate editors automatically get notice that a Ms has been received, and can indicate interest, thereby becoming the handling editor for that.

[08:03] Mike Bennett: We can query Nicola to see if the structure would be the same for the Special Issue.

[08:04] Mike Bennett: We would need to grant everyone on the Special Issue Ed Board, the same access.

[08:04] Mike Bennett: We need to get clarified fro Nicola about that.

[08:05] Mike Bennett: Internally we could use EasyChair, or we might go through the hoops at IoSPress. Can use either.

[08:05] Mike Bennett: Can switch to the IoS Press system for the final version.

[08:05] Mike Bennett: Conclusion: 1 or 2 week overhead in assigning reviews, add that to the time we give the reviewers after they have agreed. That latter: 4 weeks at least.

[08:06] Mike Bennett: Allow for summer - if Review cycle overlaps with July or August we would allow more time for that.

[08:07] Mike Bennett: Action: Mike to plug in the numbers and circulate to the group.

[08:08] Mike Bennett: Others to use this draft schedule as what they use to get feedback from the above folks who have done this.

[08:08] Mike Bennett: Next meeting: 1st Monday in April.

[08:08] Mike Bennett: Therefore, if we get the call out by end of March, gives us to September for writing submissions.

[08:08] Mike Bennett: Therefore call has to be out before next regular meeting.

[08:08] Mike Bennett: Expect to meet before the April meeting on this.

[08:09] Mike Bennett: We could use the meeting in 2 weeks to do partly this and partly the Housekeeping.

[08:09] Mike Bennett: March 16.

[08:10] Mike Bennett: Would allow us to finalize the call the week after - aim for March 20 to be out and publicized by the end of March.

[08:10] Mike Bennett: AOB?

[08:10] Mike Bennett: No


Previous Meetings

... further results