Actions

Ontolog Forum

Revision as of 06:45, 9 January 2016 by imported>KennethBaclawski (Fix PurpleMediaWiki references)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

OntologyBasedStandards mini-series session-06 - Thu 2013-11-07

Session Co-chairs: Mr. MikeBennett (EDM Council) & Professor WilliamMcCarthy (Michigan State U) ... intro slides

Topic: Ontology-based Financial Standards: Some Ongoing Work

Panel / Briefings:

  • Professor BillMcCarthy (Michigan State U) - "ISO 15944-4 (2nd edition) and the REA accounting ontology" slides
  • Mr. DaveMcComb (Semantic Arts) - "Taming Complexity in the Financial Services Industry" slides
  • Mr. MikeBennett (EDM Council) - "FIBO and Shared Semantics" slides
  • Dr. ElieAbiLahoud (University College Cork, Ireland) - "On The Road to Regulatory Ontologies: Expressing Regulations in Structured Natural Language - use of SBVR to create regulatory ontologies" slides
  • Mr. JohnHall (Model Systems, UK) - "Interpreting Regulation: some snippets from a methodology" slides

Archives

Conference Call Details

  • Date: Thursday, 7-Nov-2013
  • Start Time: 9:30am PST / 12:30pm EST / 6:30pm CST / 1730 GMT/UTC
  • Expected Call Duration: ~2.0 hours
  • Dial-in:
    • Phone (US): +1 (206) 402-0100 ... Conference ID: 141184# ... (long distance cost may apply)
    • in view of recently reported skype connection issues, this is not recommended (especially for speakers) although it may still work for some ... Skype: joinconference (i.e. make a skype call to the contact with skypeID="joinconference") ... (generally free-of-charge, when connecting from your computer ... ref.)
      • when prompted enter Conference ID: 141184#
      • Unfamiliar with how to do this on Skype? ...
        • Add the contact "joinconference" to your skype contact list first. To participate in the teleconference, make a skype call to "joinconference", then open the dial pad (see platform-specific instructions below) and enter the Conference ID: 141184# 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. ... (ref.)
      • if you are using skype and the connection to "joinconference" is not holding up, try using (your favorite POTS or VoIP line, etc.) either your phone, skype-out or google-voice and call the US dial-in number: +1 (206) 402-0100 ... when prompted enter Conference ID: 141184#
  • Shared-screen support (VNC session), if applicable, will be started 5 minutes before the call at: http://vnc2.cim3.net:5800/
    • view-only password: "ontolog"
    • if you plan to be logging into this shared-screen option (which the speaker may be navigating), and you are not familiar with the process, please try to call in 5 minutes before the start of the session so that we can work out the connection logistics. Help on this will generally not be available once the presentation starts.
    • people behind corporate firewalls may have difficulty accessing this. If that is the case, please download the slides above (where applicable) and running them locally. The speaker(s) will prompt you to advance the slides during the talk.
  • In-session chat-room url: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/ontolog_20131107
    • 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").
    • 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.
    • 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) ontolog_20131107@soaphub.org ... Handy for mobile devices!
  • 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.)
  • RSVP to peter.yim@cim3.com appreciated, ... or simply just by adding yourself to the "Expected Attendee" list below (if you are a member of the team.)
  • 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.

Attendees

  • Expecting:
    • ...
    • (please add yourself to the list above if you are a member of the community, or, rsvp to <peter.yim@cim3.com> with the event title/date and your name and affiliation)

Abstract

Ontology-based Financial Standards: Some Ongoing Work - intro slides

As with the recent session-04: The Case for a "Quantities and Units of Measure" Ontology Standard and session-05: "Ontology-based Standards in Geospatial Domains", this is a continuation of the OntologyBasedStandards mini-series that was started in late 2012 as a collaborative effort by ONTOLOG, IAOA, OASIS, OMG, various ISO working groups and the OOR Initiative. This session, is part of a program of 8 topics, which are planned to be held over the remaining time in 2013, and partly in 2014.

At this session, we will be providing an introduction and overview into some current and developing financial industry standards, where ontologies and their applications are involved - using the FIBO conceptual framework to align across standards semantics; ISO 15944 transaction semantics; Regulatory ontology applications, etc. Briefings by the panel will be followed by Q & A and an open discussion of issues.

For more detail on the mini-series please also refer to details on the OntologyBasedStandards mini-series homepage.

Briefings

  • Professor BillMcCarthy (Michigan State U) - "ISO 15944-4 (2nd edition) and the REA accounting ontology" slides
    • Abstract: The REA (Resource-Event-Agent) enterprise ontology originated in the field of accounting (with an emphasis on accountability for "what has occurred in an economic and financial sense"), but its use has expanded to include all the necessary components for a full business process model at multiple levels of abstraction and across multiple dimensions of time.
    • REA is presently used in ERP systems like Workday, but the exposition in this presentation will concentrate on its interoperability use as an economic and accounting interoperability standard, as specified in ISO 15944-4. Additionally, Professor McCarthy will discuss the monograph project commissioned by the American Accounting Association (the leading worldwide accounting research organization) that fully explains the conceptual foundation for the REA ontology components.
  • Mr. DaveMcComb (Semantic Arts) - "Taming Complexity in the Financial Services Industry" slides
    • Abstract: The Financial Services Industry has become incredibly complex. It is routine for firms to have hundreds of thousands of attributes in the sum total of their various systems. It is safe to say that no one in any of these firms understands the depth and breadth of this complexity.
    • It is our job, as ontologists, to make the data sphere of our clients and/or employers a tractable landscape. We believe it is up to us to understand the complexity, and having understood it, reduce it to its logical minimum. We're going to discuss some techniques and experiences we've had recently with two financial services firms and a State Agency, that show how semantic technology can be applied to the problem of bringing this complexity down to scale.
  • Mr. MikeBennett (EDM Council) - "FIBO and Shared Semantics" slides
    • Abstract: Mike Bennett will describe the "Financial Industry Business Ontology (FIBO)" conceptual modeling framework, and will illustrate how this is used to reconcile and re-use terms across different industry standards and ontologies. This talk will focus on the work done to represent the REA concepts for transactions within the FIBO framework and how this framework is used to reconcile these terms with the concepts in double entry accounting and XBRL.
  • Dr. ElieAbiLahoud (University College Cork, Ireland) - "On The Road to Regulatory Ontologies: Expressing Regulations in Structured Natural Language - use of SBVR to create regulatory ontologies" slides
    • Abstract: Elie will describe how the Governance Risk and Compliance Technology Centre (University College Cork) leverages "Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules (SBVR)" to interpret financial services regulations and create regulatory ontologies. He will illustrate the role of Subject Matter Experts in addressing challenges in "consuming" regulations and discuss the approach and its potential benefits & applications.
  • Mr. JohnHall (Model Systems, UK) - "Interpreting Regulation: some snippets from a methodology" slides
    • Abstract: This session presents some illustrations from a methodology for interpretation of published regulations, formalizing the language while still retaining content in business-friendly English. The methodology uses SBVR and is being developed in a collaboration between the Governance, Risk and Compliance Technology Centre (GRCTC), based at University College Cork, Ireland, Model Systems and Business Semantics Ltd. Examples are drawn from US Regulations for Anti-Money Laundering.

Agenda

OntologyBasedStandards Mini-series Panel Session-06

Session Format: this is a virtual session conducted over an augmented conference call

Proceedings

Please refer to the above

IM Chat Transcript captured during the session

see raw transcript here.

(for better clarity, the version below is a re-organized and lightly edited chat-transcript.)

Participants are welcome to make light edits to their own contributions as they see fit.

-- begin in-session chat-transcript --

Chat transcript from room: ontolog_20131107

2013-11-07 GMT-08:00 [PST]

[9:18] Peter P. Yim: Welcome to the

OntologyBasedStandards mini-series session-06 - Thu 2013-11-07

Session Co-chairs: Mr. Mike Bennett (EDM Council) & Professor WilliamMcCarthy (Michigan State U)

Topic: Ontology-based Financial Standards: Some Ongoing Work

Panel / Briefings:

  • Professor BillMcCarthy (Michigan State U) - "ISO 15944-4 (2nd edition) and the REA accounting ontology"
  • Mr. DaveMcComb (Semantic Arts) - "Taming Complexity in the Financial Services Industry"
  • Mr. Mike Bennett (EDM Council) - "FIBO and Shared Semantics"
  • Dr. ElieAbiLahoud (University College Cork, Ireland) - "On The Road to Regulatory Ontologies:

Expressing Regulations in Structured Natural Language - use of SBVR to create regulatory ontologies"

  • Mr. John Hall (Model Systems, UK) - "Interpreting Regulation: some snippets from a methodology"

Logistics:

  • (if you haven't already done so) please click on "settings" (top center) and morph from "anonymous" to your RealName
  • Mute control (phone keypad): *7 to un-mute ... *6 to mute
    • you may connect to (the skypeID) "joinconference" whether or not it indicates that it is online

(i.e. even if it says it is "offline," you should still be able to connect to it.)

    • if you are using skype and the connection to "joinconference" is not holding up, try using (your favorite POTS or

VoIP line, etc.) either your phone, skype-out or google-voice and call the US dial-in number: +1 (206) 402-0100

... when prompted enter Conference ID: 141184#

    • 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 stay with (or downgrade to) Skype version 2.x for now (as a Dial pad seems to be missing on Linux-based Skype v4.x for skype-calls.)

Please refer to details on session page at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2013_11_07

Attendees: Adam Wyner, Alex Shkotin, Amanda Vizedom, Bart Gajderowicz, BillMcCarthy, Bobbin Teegarden,

DaveMcComb, David Booth, Dennis Wisnosky, Donald Chapin, Ed Bernot, ElieAbiLahoud, Elisa Kendall,

Francesca Quattri, Frank Olken, GaryBergCross, GenZou, Isabella Distinto, Jesper Kiehn, Joanne Luciano,

JohnMcClure, John Hall, Lamar Henderson, Martin Gladwell, Max Gillmore, Michael Grüninger,

Michael Uschold, Mike Bennett, Paul Fodor, Peter P. Yim, Richard Beatch, Richard Martin, Simon Spero,

Tara Athan, Todd Schneider,

proceedings

[9:18] anonymous morphed into Isabella Distinto

[9:27] anonymous morphed into DaveMcComb

[9:27] anonymous morphed into Richard Beatch

[9:27] anonymous1 morphed into Martin Gladwell

[9:29] anonymous morphed into Bart Gajderowicz

[9:31] anonymous morphed into John Hall

[9:32] anonymous morphed into Francesca Quattri

[9:32] anonymous1 morphed into ElieAbiLahoud

[9:33] Francesca Quattri: Hi Peter, It's me ... [thanks. =ppy]

[9:34] anonymous morphed into David Booth

[9:34] anonymous1 morphed into Michael Uschold

[9:34] anonymous morphed into Jesper Kiehn

[9:35] Joanne Luciano: Hi Everyone!

[9:35] anonymous1 morphed into Max Gillmore

[9:35] Mike Bennett: sorry I changed windows in skype and can't find the dial pad again

[9:36] ElieAbiLahoud: in the menu under Call

[9:36] Mike Bennett: Yes, once you go to another chat window the main skype window no longer shows

the call. Found it in the end.

[9:36] anonymous morphed into Donald Chapin

[9:36] Frank Olken: Frank Olken is on the teleconference and chat room.

[9:38] Joanne Luciano: the vnc is asking for a password VNC authication

[9:38] Mike Bennett: ontolog

[9:38] Joanne Luciano: thanks Mike!

[9:39] anonymous morphed into Simon Spero

[9:39] anonymous1 morphed into JohnMcClure

[9:49] jkiehn morphed into Jesper Kiehn

[9:39] Peter P. Yim: == Mike Bennett and BillMcCarthy starts the session - see slides at:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2013_11_07#nid40I9

[9:40] List of members: Adam Wyner, Alex Shkotin, Amanda Vizedom, Bart Gajderowicz, BillMcCarthy,

DaveMcComb, David Booth, Donald Chapin, Ed Bernot, ElieAbiLahoud, Francesca Quattri, Frank Olken, GenZou,

Isabella Distinto, Jesper Kiehn, Joanne Luciano, JohnMcClure, John Hall, Martin Gladwell, Max Gillmore,

Michael Uschold, Michael Grüninger, Mike Bennett, Peter P. Yim, Richard Beatch, Richard Martin, Simon Spero,

Tara Athan, Todd Schneider, vnc2

[9:51] Todd Schneider: We should avoid using the term 'meaning', it's misleading in the context of

the use of explicit semantics in information systems. 'Interpretation' is the more correct (and

descriptive) term.

[9:54] Alex Shkotin: @Todd, 'meaning' is logical term, 'interpretation' - maths. We need both:-)

[9:56] Mike Bennett: Hmmmm...

[9:56] Todd Schneider: Alex, humans may make sense of 'meaning', computers interpret.

[9:58] Alex Shkotin: @Todd, and we have 'definition' in common;-)

[9:56] Peter P. Yim: == BillMcCarthy presenting ...

[10:01] Joanne Luciano: [ re. BillMcCarthy's slide#4 ] not clear what the different color in the

lines (and different types of lines) mean

[10:02] Mike Bennett: @Joanne, Black = independent view; red = view as seen from within the firm and

reported in the accounts.

[10:08] Michael Uschold: [ re. BillMcCarthy slide#8 ] Does this mean Public Administration agents are

not Organizations? What definition of Organization excludes a Public Administration?

[10:10] Mike Bennett: There's potential there for a more comprehensive ontology of organizations,

persons, legal persons, persons defined by their function (such as public admin; business etc.) and

so on, I think.

[10:13] Joanne Luciano: feedback to presenter: arrows on dashed lines in slides 13 and 14 would help

the slide convey the static slide

[10:11] Richard Beatch: Mike, leaving granularity aside for now, are the categories here consistent

with FIBO? Do they need to be?

[10:15] Mike Bennett: @Richard At present, no. Firstly, we model "Party" as a relative thing (some

entity in some role); and secondly we distinguish between legal persons, organizations, and things

which are both. Hence (per my note above) Public Administration would not be in the top level set.

We have autonomous agent (corresponds to ISO Person), split into legal person, human being and

organization; and separately we have entities defined by their function (business, non profit,

special purpose vehicles etc.). But it's a close fit.

[10:22] Joanne Luciano: @MikeBennett re @Richard -- not consistent but a close fit? is that same_as

or different_from close but no cigar? :-) ... what are the implications of them not being

consistent? what doesn't work? what is gained with consistency? (interoperability?)

[10:23] Mike Bennett: @Joanne a good example of the kind of thing I want to try to unpack in my

presentation :)

[10:23] Max Gillmore: I think that it would be perfectly possible to apply REA concepts to conversion

transactions (machine can be abstracted as an Agent)

[10:26] Francesca Quattri: really sorry to leave but I am knocked down by the late hour. Peter, do

you think we can reach a compromise with the world clock for the next sessions? Thanks to All

Presenters for the slides.

[10:49] Peter P. Yim: @FrancescaQuattri, ... the regular Ontolog event timing is almost an institution

(some community members actually carve out this time slot in their busy schedules to participate);

that said, the community collectively, makes the call ... let's discuss this offline ... noting

though, that "asynchronous" participation is already supported, in a significant way.

[10:28] Peter P. Yim: == DaveMcComb presenting ...

[10:30] Joanne Luciano: [ re. DaveMcComb's slide#5 ] @Dave - laughing at his joke - make you an offer

you can't understand

[10:30] Michael Uschold: Yeah, no laugh track, just is not the same :-)

[10:38] anonymous morphed into Simon Spero

[10:38] Mike Bennett: Hi Simon, you got a good mention on the previous presentation.

[10:40] Simon Spero: @mike- yeah- tablet browser dropped me from chat, but Skype lives

[10:40] anonymous morphed into Elisa Kendall

[10:41] Simon Spero: Gist (on the internet) is tied in to github :-)

[10:42] Simon Spero: ( https://gist.github.com )

[10:41] Michael Uschold: FYI: The core of the REA model has a very natural and fairly direct mapping

to gist.

[10:42] Joanne Luciano: +1 on reducing the complexity -- I like the way gist looks/sounds

[10:45] Bobbin Teegarden: Man as the anti-entropic force in the universe -- Dave's GIST is a great

example of just that.

[10:43] Mike Bennett: Things should be as simple as possible and no simpler. Hence the importance of

high level, atomic concepts I think.

[10:47] Amanda Vizedom: I agree, with the caveat that maximum simplicity sometimes means using

high-level atomic concepts and sometimes means using more specific ones. The Einstein quote

(@MikeBennett [10:43]) has a corresponding principle regarding generality: Concepts and relations

should be asserted as generally as possible (at the most general level at which the relation you

want to assert is true), and no more generally.

[10:49] Simon Spero: An employee, a customer and a pilot walk in to a bar

[10:50] Joanne Luciano: @Amanda - yes, to me, goes without saying, but at the same time, it's good to

have (re)stated so we know we agree. occam's razor

[10:50] Amanda Vizedom: @DaveMcComb: Nice articulation of where the complexity comes from and how it

is amenable to reduction.

[10:55] Amanda Vizedom: @Joanne: I mention it because I don't think it goes without saying -- I do

think that many here understand it, but in practice, people model both too specifically (which Dave

was mostly addressing) and too generally (choosing a high-level model that encumbers future

extensions and models with expectations that may not fit.) I think that Dave's emphasis on the

lightweight nature of the high-level notions probably is addressed to this, but as it wasn't

explicit, I thought it worth noting.

[10:58] Joanne Luciano: @AmandaVizedom, Nice articulation of Dave's nice articulation summarizing the

lessons learned from merging data in business applications and that it's useful to start with

understanding from SME and getting the gist. @ Amanda -- you're right. I was making an assumption in

the context of the call. Glad that you made it explicit.

[10:58] Amanda Vizedom: Perhaps @DaveMcComb or @MichaelUschold can tell us if I'm right about that

aspect of gist.

[11:05] Michael Uschold: TO Amanda: which aspect of gist?

[11:10] Michael Uschold: We have a gist introduction white paper that describes the design rationale

of gist; if you cannot find it online, ping me.

[11:17] Amanda Vizedom: @MichaelUschold - Thanks, I'll check it out.

[11:10] Michael Uschold: A key thing about this is that it is small enough to get your head around

and actually start using, but specific enough to have a starting place for modelling almost anything

that arises in a typical enterprise. Also specific enough in terms of axioms, to do useful

consistency checking to catch errors.

[10:45] Peter P. Yim: == Mike Bennett presenting ...

[10:45] anonymous morphed into John Hall

[10:59] Joanne Luciano: [ re. MikeBennett's slide#7 ] @Mike, "Relative thing" to me looks like "Role"

[11:06] Michael Uschold: [ re. MikeBennett's slide#16 ] @Mike, Is a FIBO Aspect like a part or

component of something, or more like a property or attribute of something?

[11:23] Mike Bennett: @Michael not a component, more like an attribute or more accurately a side or

viewpoint. It's very underspecified at this point.

[11:08] Amanda Vizedom: @Michael: That the high-level aspects are lightweight, thus potentially

mitigating people's tendency to model too generally, as well as what Dave talked about explicitly

wrt mitigation of modeling too specifically,

[11:09] Elisa Kendall: @Joanne @Mike regarding relative thing looking like role -- for the most part

in the current ontology, we're restricting Mike's notion of relative things exactly to parties in a

role -- so, for example, with regards to parties in the context of a trust agreement, we have

trustor, trustee, beneficiary, all of which are parties to the trust agreement and have identity of

an independent party (beneficiaries in particular don't need to be legal persons, but can include minors, etc.).

[11:12] Simon Spero: @MikeBennett: contract has fairly specific meaning in law. A

[11:13] Simon Spero: essential feature is that it is legally enforceable

[11:14] Mike Bennett: @Simon precisely. This is why it makes the whole model simpler if you don't

regard agreement and contract as the same kind of thing.

[11:14] Peter P. Yim: @BillMcCarthy, @MikeBennett - [ re. MikeBennett's slide#17 ] is there an adequate

mapping (or harmonization) between "transactions" concepts in REA and XBRL

[11:15] Mike Bennett: @Peter we had just started to look at the formal mapping into XBRL when we

temporarily suspended this series of calls to focus on other more immediate technical issues. We

intend to fiure out how to align these concepts with XBRL-GL and we are confident that the use of

the Aspect concept makes this possible.

[11:17] Peter P. Yim: @MikeBennett - would it be easier to have FIBO be grounded on a single Ontology

(say REA) and *then* map to other system/ontology(s)?

[11:18] Mike Bennett: @Peter that's the original intent of the FIBO Foundational ontology components.

REA concepts live in a specific context, though we were able to promote a number of those terms to a

broader context.

[11:19] Mike Bennett: What I hope to have shown is that there is potential to do this kind of thing

more broadly across semantic-based standards communities.

[11:11] Peter P. Yim: == ElieAbiLahoud presenting ...

[11:15] Amanda Vizedom: Aside: Something I like about all of these presentations: The modeling

approaches are explicitly *both* realistic *and* multi-perspectival. I think that this is probably

the only way to adequately model a complex domain with multiple actor-types, each with its own view

on (part of) the domain. It is worth calling out an applauding as a practical approach, however,

because it resists the methodological pressures from certain corners of the field to either reject

any talk of an underlying reality (and talk only of conceptualizations) or to reject the need for,

or validity of, multiple perspectives on a domain.

[11:23] Simon Spero: would like to come back to the sources - as warrants and authority: There's CFR

and USC, where CFR authority must be found in the USC (and scope of definitions can be a common

source of income for DC Circuit lawyers

[11:26] Peter P. Yim: == John Hall presenting ...

[11:31] Mike Bennett: @Simon I think there's a lot of scope for taking concepts that we simply put in

the taxonomic hierarchy, and putting more legal and social constructs around them. Ultimately we

should be able to use Searle's ontology of social constructs to do justice to most of those.

[11:32] Simon Spero: Mike: this is what I'm talking about

[11:36] Simon Spero: [Ejusdem generis]

[11:42] Peter P. Yim: == Wrap up ...

[11:43] JohnMcClure: [ tried making a verbal remark, but was on mute, and we ran out of time ] too bad

[11:44] JohnMcClure: REA model is missing public goods, externalities and open source

[11:44] Peter P. Yim: let's do our Q&A and open discussion asynchronously on the

[ontology-based-standards] mailing list - see:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-based-standards

[11:44] Peter P. Yim: Join us again, in two weeks (Thu 2013_11_21) for the RulesReasoningLP mini-series

session-03: Concepts and Foundations of Rules and Ontologies: Logic Programs, Classical Logic, and

Semantic Web - II - Co-chairs: Leo Obrst & Pascal Hitzler

[11:45] Peter P. Yim: next in this series - 2013_12_12 - Thursday: OntologyBasedStandards mini-series

session-07: "How ontologies can help with the formal specification of the natural language

standards" - co-champions: Simon Spero, Ken Baclawski, Richard Martin, Adam Wyner, Mark Johnson

[11:46] JohnMcClure: thanks peter and presenters! great info

[11:46] Alex Shkotin: Great plans! Bye.

[11:46] Peter P. Yim: -- session ended: 11:46am PST --

-- end of in-session chat-transcript --

Additional Resources

For the record ...

How To Join (while the session is in progress)



Retrieved from "https://ontologforum.com/index.php?title=ConferenceCall_2013_11_07&oldid=3019"