From OntologPSMW

Jump to: navigation, search
[ ]


OpenOntologyRepository: OOR Team Conference Call - Wed 2008-04-04     (1)

  • 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.     (1B7)

Attendees     (1D)

Agenda Ideas     (1E)

  • (please insert content below; identify yourself for follow-up purposes)     (1E1)
  • Peter P. Yim: postmortem on the 3/27 & 4/3 joint OOR-OntologySummit2008 panel discussions, and status review on the upcoming 4/10 session     (1E2)
  • Peter P. Yim: further discussion on this OOR-team's deliverable at the Ontology Summit 2008 workshop (28~29-Apr-2008) at NIST (Gaithersburg, MD, USA), and other things we might want to do when we meet face-to-face there.     (1E3)

Agenda and Proceedings     (1F)

1. Meeting called to order:     (1F1)

2. Roll Call:     (1F5)

3. Status Review and Discussion:     (1F7)

  • postmortem on the 3/27 & 4/3 joint OOR-OntologySummit2008 panel discussions     (1F12)
    • See the "OOR: Rationale, Expectations & Requirements" session proceedings at:     (1F12A)
    • reminding OOR-Panelists to send in their 2-slide summaries     (1F12B)
    • reminding content people to send in their 3 top requirements per Leo's request     (1F12C)
    • Michelle: will cull the discussions and fold "requirements" into the [repository-architecture] topic thread     (1F12D)
    • Peter: I invited Rob Raskin (NASA/JPL - SWEET ontologies & to the team, and he has agreed. We'll be seeing him at the 4/28~29 face-to-face.     (1F12E)
    • Doug Lenat (on his 4/3 talk) alluded to the Large Knowledge Collider (LarKC) project from the EU, we should consider making contact with the people driving this initiative to explore possible synergies. Anyone close to them?     (1F12F)
  • status review on the upcoming 4/10 session     (1F13)
    • things are coming along fine. See developing agenda at ConferenceCall_2008_04_10     (1F13A)
  • Peter P. Yim: further discussion on this OOR-team's deliverable at the Ontology Summit 2008 workshop (28~29-Apr-2008) at NIST (Gaithersburg, MD, USA), and other things we might want to do when we meet face-to-face there. ... (discussion from last meeting)--v     (1F14)
    • 'target something we can "show" from this OOR effort at the Ontology Summit 2008 workshop     (1F14A)
    • Bruce: I will be out of pocket 3/25 to 4/12     (1F14B)
    • Farrukh: this is too short a time to get a demo together; maybe we should only consider developing a demo scenario, and present the OOR-team's Strategy, Plans and Roadmap     (1F14C)
      • Rex: is it possible to show something tangible too?     (1F14C1)
      • Farrukh: let's present the 'what', not the 'how'     (1F14C2)
      • presenting the vision at the summit F2F     (1F14C3)
      • Bruce: let's present something we have accomplished rather than something we are planning to accomplish     (1F14C4)
      • Michelle: will clarify time allocation at F2F - put in a 1.5-Hr request <--adopted     (1F14C5)
      • Peter: suggest we put together task force to handle the preparation of this OOR-team presentation (mainly the implementation folks) - Bruce, Mike, Mark, Farrukh, Evan & Peter     (1F14C6)
      • Peter: alternate suggestion for the task force to handle the preparation of this OOR-team presentation (mainly the co-chairs) - Leo, Frank Fabian, Barry, Pat     (1F14C7)
      • Bruce: propose to have Leo and Peter to champion this presentation effort, and Leo to be the lead speaker <--adopted     (1F14C8)
        • updated/2008.03.21 with Bruce's concurrence - Leo Obrst, Mike Dean and Peter P. Yim to champion this presentation effort, and Leo to be the lead speaker     (1F14C8A)
        • Leo: I could kick off the presentation in the overview, and then have individual speakers for each section (we'll be looking for volunteers) <--adopted     (1F14C8B)
      • Leo: start asking all panelists (in the 4 sessions) to come up with a 2-slide summary <--adopted     (1F14C9)
        • all speakers are requested to send in a 2-slide summary of their brief (in addition to the slide deck they use during the briefing) for use in a presentation that the OOR-team will be making at the Ontology Summit 2008 face-to-face workshop     (1F14C9A)
      • Ravi: two threads here - (a) summary of what's going on, (b) how we are thinking about the roadmap to implementation     (1F14C10)
      • Leo: summarizing - (i) Overview, rationale and motivations, (ii) existing efforts, and how they satisfy the rationale, (iii) what people need, and how they satisfy the rationale, (iv) summarizing that into requirements, and how they satisfy the rationale, & (v) the roadmap to developing/delivering that in an OOR implementation effort, and how they satisfy the rationale <--adopted     (1F14C11)
      • therefore, we need more time, let's ask for 1.5 Hours     (1F14C12)
      • Bruce: emphasize why an OOR is needed ... more so than telling people that we know how to get there     (1F14C13)
      • Farrukh: we need to clarify that we are NOT advocating a single central repository ... federation is where we are going     (1F14C14)
    • new! - the summit organizing committee is bringing up the possibility of making arrangements (or alloting time) for doing demos again! Mark Musen suggested that this is one of the things that we can do much better at a F2F than doing virtually. Given that, what can/should this team come up with.     (1F14D)
      • Peter: ALL, please watch out on the [ontology-summit] & [oor-forum] list for more details as the organizing committee decides on whether or not, and how, we will be serving demos     (1F14D1)
      • Mike: if so, suggest we setup a page where people could register their intent to show demos     (1F14D2)
      • Ravi: need to communicate with NIST ref. firewall issues that may affect the demos     (1F14D3)
      • Gerry Creager mentioned that he is working on coming to the F2F, and its possible for him to run a demo of their current work (which John Graybeal has alluded to this group before.)     (1F14D4)
  • Resources and Funding: - mostly from previous discussions     (1F15)
  • Funding: getting organized     (1F16)
    • possibilities - government agencies (NSF?, NIST?, whoever would fund open infrastructure, DARPA, IARPA (Jeff), ... etc.); EU funders; Vulcan (Mark)?; bring in W3C in a exploratory (XG) working group (e.g. Semantic Web Deployment) (although they are a funding sink rather than a funding source; but good for visibility);        (1F16A)
    • grant proposal team(s) / submit proposal(s) to     (1F16B)
    • Frank: NSF next solicitations due July-1, interop, data network partners, programs coming back     (1F16C)
    • try contacting Todd Hughes and see if DARPA is a possibility (Leo)     (1F16D)
    • Peter: consider multiple smalls proposals and a big one ($20 million +/-) to make OOR a sustainable OOR operation     (1F16E)
    • consider Foundations, and institutions like Vulcan (Peter).     (1F16F)
      • Peter: Mark G already responded that funding chances are low, but possibility of collaboration with HALO ontologies hosted on OOR     (1F16F1)
    • Fabian: the climate at NIST (now that they are hosting the summit on this particular theme) would be conducive ... we should ping Steve on this.     (1F16G)
    • we should set aside some off-line time to discuss this when some of us are at the summit F2F     (1F16H)
      • Mike will help see if Todd Hughes and other relevant program managers could join us there at the summit F2F.     (1F16H1)
      • idea: [OT] have a bulletin board to help bring together BOF gatherings     (1F16H2)
  • Use Cases & Requirements     (1F17)
    • soliciting 'early adopter' partners who can offer up their ontologies, help refine requirements, and provide user feedback.     (1F17A)
    • see above discussion ref. the two joint OOR-OntologySummit2008 panel discussion sessions (3/27 & 4/3)     (1F17B)
  • Organization & Process <--will defer the discussion after the summit workshop     (1F18)
    • need to clearly identify team membership: active members vs. observers; and, more importantly, who are voting (decision making) members?     (1F18A)
      • Active members: those who will be (a) building the OOR, and (b) those who will be early adopters with content (open ontologies) AND specific requirement input to provide -- does that sound good? (Yes: Peter, Bruce, Fabian)     (1F18A1)
      • will need to deliberate on this when we have more people on the call ... and/or doing it through the mailing list     (1F18A2)
    • how shall we organize ourselves? ... sub-workgroups? how many? <--(discussion deferred to next meeting)     (1F18B)
    • relationship to Ontolog? sponsors? funders?     (1F18C)
      • discussion postponed until we have a clearer approach toward funding)     (1F18C1)

4. New Issues:     (1F20)

5. Any Other Business:     (1F21)

6. Action items:     (1F22)

7. Schedule Next Meeting & Adjourn:     (1F23)

notes taken by: Peter P. Yim / 2008.04.04-10:20am PDT     (1F27)

All participants, please review and edit to enhance accuracy and granularity of the documented proceedings.     (1F28)

Resources     (1G)

This page has been migrated from the OntologWiki - Click here for original page     (1G14)