Actions

Ontolog Forum

Revision as of 06:31, 9 January 2016 by imported>KennethBaclawski (Fix PurpleMediaWiki references)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Ontology Summit 2010: Community Session-6 - "Final Sync-up (before the Symposium)" - Thu 11-Mar-2010

Ontology Summit 2010 Theme: "Creating the Ontologists of the Future"

  • Community Session-6 Topic: "Review and Alignment of Draft Deliverables and Final sync-up prior to the symposium"

Conference Call Details

  • Date: Thursday, 11-March-2010
  • Start Time: 10:30am PDT / 1:30pm EDT / 7:30pm CET / 6:30pm GMT / 18:30 UTC
  • Expected Call Duration: ~2.0 hours
  • Dial-in Number:
    • from a US telephone (US): +1-218-844-8060 (domestic long distance cost will apply)
    • When calling in from a phone, use Conference ID: "4389979#"
    • from Europe, call:
      • Austria 0820-4000-1577
      • Belgium 070-35-9992
      • France 0826-100-280
      • Germany 01805-00-7642
      • Ireland 0818-270-037
      • Italy 848-390-179
      • Spain 0902-886-056
      • Switzerland 0848-560-327
      • UK 0844-581-9148
    • callers from other countries please dial into either one of the US or European numbers
  • Shared-screen support (VNC session) 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 and running them locally. The speaker(s) will prompt you to advance the slides during the talk.
  • Discussions and Q & A:
    • (Unless the conference host has already muted everyone) Please mute your phone, by pressing "*2" on your phone keypad, when a presentation is in progress. To un-mute, press "*3"
    • You can type in your questions or comments through the browser based chat session by:
    • or point your browser to: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/ontolog_20100311
      • instructions: once you got access to the page, click on the "settings" button, and identify yourself (by modifying the Name field). 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.
    • (when everyone is muted) If you want to speak or have questions or remarks to make, please "raise your hand (virtually)" by click on the "hand button" (lower right) on the chat session page. You may speak when acknowledged by the speaker or the session moderator (again, press "*3" on your phone to unmute). 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 "*2" on your phone to mute yourself after you are done speaking.)
    • 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_20100311@soaphub.org ... Handy for mobile devices!
  • Please note that this session will be recorded, and the audio archive is expected to be made available as open content to our community membership and the public at-large under our prevailing open IPR policy.

Attendees

  • Expecting:
    • ... if you are coming to the session, please add your name above (plus your affiliation, if you aren't already a member of the community) above; or e-mail <peter.yim@cim3.com> so that we can reserve enough resources to support everyone's participation. ...

Resources

Theme: Ontology Summit 2010 - Creating the Ontologists of the Future

This is our 5th Ontology Summit, a joint initiative by NIST, Ontolog, NCOR, NCBO and IAOA with the support of our co-sponsors. The theme adopted for this Ontology Summit is: "Creating the Ontologists of the Future" and was launched on 10-Dec-2009. Like previous years, this Ontology Summit will comprise of three months of virtual discourse, over our archived mailing lists, wiki, and virtual panel sessions (like this one), and will culminate in a 2-day face-to-face workshop/symposium to be held on Mon & Tue, 15 & 16-March-2010 at NIST (Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA.)

  • Session Topic: Review and Alignment of Draft Deliverables and Final sync-up prior to the symposium
  • . Abstract:
As we are only less than a week from the Mar. 15 & 16 Symposium, this session will be devoted to getting the community ready for that. This session will start with the co-lead editors of our summit communique presenting a draft of that Communique. It will be followed by commentaries from the panel of co-editors, made up of all the Summit Track co-champions.
The session will then open up to general Q&A and discussion, which will revolve around:
    • fine tuning the draft deliverables
    • identifying open issues that need to be discussed at length during the symposium, and
    • covering all Q&A on logistics or other issues relating to the 2010.03.15 & 16 Symposium at NIST

Agenda & Proceedings

OntologySummit2010 - virtual panel-6 - Topic: "Syntheses on Community Input"

Getting Ready for the Symposium

  • The general process (and etiquette):
    • New issues for the Ontology Symposium 2010 agenda should be raised prior to the actual meeting, with a deadline of Saturday, March 13, 2010.
    • A new issue can be added to the agenda during the Face-To-Face only if at least three participants support the move.

Transcript of the online chat 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 of chat session --

Peter P. Yim: .

Welcome to the Ontology Summit 2010: Community Session-6 - "Final Sync-up (before the Symposium)" - Thu 11-Mar-2010

Ontology Summit 2010 Theme: "Creating the Ontologists of the Future"

  • Community Session-6 Topic: "Review and Alignment of Draft Deliverables and Final sync-up prior to the symposium"
  • Panelists: (All Track Co-champions)

o Present Ontologist Education: Arturo Sanchez & Antony Galton

o Education & Training Content: Leo Obrst & Michael Grüninger

o Training Requirements: Amanda Vizedom

o Future of Ontology Discipline: Elizabeth Florescu & Peter P. Yim

o Assuring Quality in Education & Training: Barry Smith, Nicola Guarino & Fabian Neuhaus

o Symposium: Steve Ray, Barry Smith

o Communique: Barry Smith, Fabian Neuhaus

.

Please refer to dial-in, agenda and other details on the session page

at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2010_03_11

.

anonymous morphed into Simon Spero

anonymous morphed into Amanda Vizedom

Simon Spero: No slides = no need for VNC?

Peter P. Yim: please refer to:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2010_Communique/Draft ... which is being

discussed

Peter P. Yim: suggested change .... Barry & Peter ... ref.

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2010_Communique/Draft#nid2B95 where it says:

the ontolog community ... we should be more inclusive - all organizers, those who endorse the

communique, etc. ...

Peter P. Yim: how about something like: "As next steps, the undersigned (individuals who endorse this

Communique), along with the co-organizers of this Summit, recommend ..."

Steve Ray: For the record - recognize that we have explicit endorsement of recommendations documented

already as "Sponsors" of the Ontology Summit. We can also collect a list of "Communique Endorsers"

as in past years (Peter's suggestion).

Simon Spero: Usual code phrase is "affiliation presented for identification only"

Todd Schneider: General Comment: 0) I think the summary and introduction need to make reference to

the larger area of semantic technologies and how ontology is the vital link.

Todd Schneider: General Comment: 1) Need to include the terms systems, and not just projects.

Steve Ray: Suggest we limit the communique text to interpretations and findings from the surveys,

with links to supplemental pages that will include detailed numbers.

Michelle Raymond: Sentence structure modification - last sentence of paragraph: The 2010 Ontology

Summit community is in general agreement that the most valuable and urgently needed training will be

informed not only by theoretical considerations but also, and centrally, by the needs of ontologists

seeking employment and employers seeking quality, useful ontologists. Our understanding of those

needs, however, has been scattered and divergent. With the aim of improving this understanding,

several discussions, a Panel session, and a survey were undertaken.

Michelle Raymond: Grammar modifications: We wanted to develop a richer and more clear picture of the

requirements of ontologist employability (that is, those trained should be well-prepared for the

available jobs) and deployability (that is, those who hire trained ontologists find them ready and

able to perform the needed work). To that end, we aimed to bring a strong "end-user" voice to the

conversation. Each of our panelists embodied one or more end-user perspectives. Most had some

combination of experience as a working ontologist, an employer, a manager, an evaluator or

on-the-job trainer of ontologists, and a gatherer of lessons learned from full life-cycle ontology

projects.

Simon Spero: a separate methodology section

Todd Schneider: I will provide comments to the editors by Monday. I need to join another meeting. See

you next week.

Steve Ray: Suggest we change the heading "What are the requirements for ontologists?" to "What are

the skill requirements for ontologists?" This is to avoid the interpretation of the heading as

meaning something like "Does society have a need for ontologists?"

Rex Brooks: I think that the two paragraphs after 2BLD could be dropped in favor of a link to a

subreport that can focus more on the results of the surveys.

Steve Ray: @Rex: I agree.

Rex Brooks: @Steve: I agree with your previous point as well.

Simon Spero: This is possible cf: http://www.ils.unc.edu/digccurr/

Michelle Raymond: @Amanda: I agree with you statement that noting the state of education available

and the identified education need should be highlighted.

Simon Spero: @Amanda: or... what sort of questions should one ask faculty candidates who would be

teaching in this area

Michelle Raymond: @Amanda: I think it very interesting to note what educators, what those who hire,

and what those who want education desire in training. I don't know that details belong in the

communnique, but do think they should be noted in the summit wiki pages.

Peter P. Yim: Fabian going into the section about Arturo & Antony's section on the communique now ...

Steve Ray: Recommend we add a link to the ACM/IEEE curriculum model, within paragraph (2AXU)

Michelle Raymond: I agree with less detail, more policy in communique. Provide links to other Summit

material.

Peter P. Yim: On the section "What are the expected developments of the future?" I'd like to draw

people's attention to: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2010_Survey#nid28DS ...

and in particular the "Study Results" section at the end of that section The links for reference are

available there; I would defer to the lead editors to pare down this whole section

Peter P. Yim: the section (as written now) is also available, and can be linked to at:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2010_FutureDevelopments_Synthesis#nid25HK

Amanda Vizedom: @Simon - I'm glad you mentioned this. I wanted to make the recommendation, following

the description of how the survey was distributed (abbreviated here, will be extended on the

Requirements Synthesis page -

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2010_PresentRequirements_Synthesis), that a

new, long-running survey (or other collection mechanism) be stood up...

Simon Spero: @Steve - the [[DigCCur]] program is IMLS funded research to develop a curriculum for

digital curation

Simon Spero: Ontology could be similar

Rex Brooks: I think the summary is fine as it is. I do think we need some conclusions, such as saying

that education budgets for ontologist need to be increased because there are needs going wanting

now.

Simon Spero: Should be something suitable for Chronicle/THES

Amanda Vizedom: ... It's clear that the short time of the survey, along with the trial & error method

of soliciting input more broadly, limited the quantity and diversity of input. We got great input,

including some from outside the current Ontolog community, but it has clear limitations. You point

to an example: there are clearly activities and organizations that are relevant but not represented.

A longer-running survey would have a better chance of making its way into more and other

communities, and to draw input from them. In addition, the Survey Monkey mechanism was very useful

but also limited. We might look to Digcurr for ideas and tools, and we certainly could use the first

round findings and lessons to improve the content.

Rex Brooks: It would be acceptable to me if we gave the chart as an example of the survey results we

link to.

Simon Spero: "What do Digital Curators do and What do They Need to Know?" -- feel free to substitute

into quotation

Steve Ray: @Simon: I'm confused by your references to digital curators, and your earlier link to

digccurr. How is this related to training of ontologists?

Simon Spero: @SteveRay: it's an IMLS funded study of how to develop a curriculum for the digital

archivists on the future; this is similar

Rex Brooks: @Simon: is this related to the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model-an RDFSchema that could

and should eventually be upgraded to a full-blown ontology?

Simon Spero: @Rex: it's a bit more meta

Simon Spero: (though I did owl an earlier CIDOC)

Rex Brooks: @Simon: thanks. I'll look at it.

Simon Spero: There's been a split between Computer Science and Information/Library Science that a

lot of this falls into the middle zone

Rex Brooks: @Simon: Do you have a url to your earlier OWL CIDOC?

Simon Spero: @Rex: I can't remember where I stashed it. It was during a very boring conference

session, with no wireless. They did have one online

Rex Brooks: @Simon: I'll look for it.

Steve Ray: @Simon: OK, the similarity is that the IMLS study was to develop a curriculum (in a

different domain)?

Simon Spero: @SteveRay: Right

Simon Spero: @SteveRay: just as digital curation has links to the past of archiving and other

curation

Simon Spero: @SteveRay: ontology has links to the past of information & knowledge organization

Simon Spero: @Pavithra they're two related things

Simon Spero: There are some core skills

Simon Spero: There are some skills that are core to some subareas

Simon Spero: I think you need some logic

Simon Spero: Information organization

Simon Spero: iSchool stuff

Simon Spero: To implement a peta-scale triple store, you need one set of skills

Simon Spero: To design a cognitively useful organization of knowledge you need another

Amanda Vizedom: @Fabian: I suggest a third track - a kind of knowledge manager, perhaps (in normative

and non-normative flavors).

Amanda Vizedom: To document some of what I just said: I think that there is a third identifiable

cluster, to which I belong. It isn't traditional software engineering, in that its practitioners may

not have traditional IT interests or primary skills (though we have to develop some of them) and are

focused on the human belief and decision systems of which the IT is a part. It doesn't fit the

community-focused cluster, as described, because it need not be domain-specific. In fact, to me the

good stuff is cross-domain, and (adding to what I said) it may be the case that much of the demand

is going to be cross-domain, in that it is driven by interoperability, transparency, and such (be it

cross-functional or Linked Open Data!).

Simon Spero: Right

Simon Spero: A core and a small number of specialty tracks

Michelle Raymond: @Amanda: I wonder if the important characteristics of cross-domain ontologist, are

intrinsic to being a "good"-ontologist. I'm not coming up with a unique skill I use in cross-domain

ontology development/analysis that aren't a part of "good"-ontology development/analysis. The beyond

ontology skills are the same: software engineering and human relations skills. I think I would pull

out domain knowledge all together.

Simon Spero: @Michelle: We've had debates about this within my cohort; what is it useful for

non-tologists to know about ontology

Michelle Raymond: OK, I recind my domain knowledge comment. Domain knowledge is relevant as

understanding terminology within a domain. Domain knowledge is relevant as understanding how

information is commonly structured within a domain. These are value-adds.

Rex Brooks: @Amanda: Yes, we need to understand the cross-domain applications/training is important.

It's not an absolute requirement like the core, but it is very important when we need ontologists

who understand formal logic and can apply it to making ontologically accurate calculations for

policy enforcement points in routing, for instance. That crosses the human-machine communities since

it is human social structures that define policies and need to put them in storage systems that can

be accessed for policy enforcement.

Simon Spero: @Amanda: what's not being taught ?

Simon Spero: cf: http://ils.unc.edu/digccurr/digccurr-matrix.html

Simon Spero: also: http://ils.unc.edu/digccurr/digccurr-funct-categories.pdf

Amanda Vizedom: Another observation (made on phone): The survey did produce unexpected results, and

these are helpful to curriculum developers. To the extent that we want to refine our understanding

of needs and clusters thereof, and to keep that current as the field develops, it would be useful to

have a long-running, more sophisticated collection mechanism.

Simon Spero: @Amanda good point

Peter P. Yim: @Fabian & Barry - we still need an ending - ref.

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2008_Communique#nid1GY0 or

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2009_Communique#nid1WNA

Simon Spero: Should there be a list of what you need to know to do certain jobs

Simon Spero: that are classes as onto

Amanda Vizedom: @Simon - I don't think we're that far along as a field. But that is something toward

which we should move. Ontologists should be able to assess what training they need. And, with great

emphasis, if those with positions to fill had something to work with, such that they might be able

to actually identify some of the job requirements and hire appropriate people, that would be a major

advancement.

Amanda Vizedom: Noting action item for me: Move detail to Requirements Synthesis page. Cover only

interesting, interpreted results.

Rex Brooks: I have to sign off now, and I just want to thank you all for the great effort!

Simon Spero: Note: the registration according to NIST closes today, not tuesday

Simon Spero: expectations?

Michelle Raymond: I've got to sign off. All - enjoy the face-to-face meeting.

Steve Ray: Steve: amend Monday morning agenda

Simon Spero: I want a full set of syllabi ready

Peter P. Yim: suggestions for F2F discussion: Michael, Barry / Peter et al. ... (a) strategic action and

follow-ups, (b) next level of details in curricula, (c) what can we do at FOIS to continue the

effort,

Peter P. Yim: -- session ended 12:21pm PST --

-- end of chat session --

  • ... More Questions
    • For those who have further questions or remarks on the topic, please post them to the "ontology-summit" list so that everyone in the community can benefit from the discourse ... see the next section (below) on how you can participate, if you aren't already a member of the community.)

An Open Invitation

If you do find this initiative interesting or useful, we cordially invite you to join us in the "Ontology Summit 2010" virtual discourse that will be taking place in the next 3 months or so, and to the face-to-face workshop that will be held on 15 & 16-March-2010 as part of the NIST Interoperability Week in Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA.

  • Registration for the 2010.03.15~16 (remote participation) Workshop / Symposium is still open (registration for on-site attendance has already closed) - Join us! ... Note: No fees ... see: OntologySummit2010/WorkshopRegistration

Audio Recording of this Session

  • To download the audio recording of the session, click here
    • the playback of the audio files require the proper setup, and an MP3 compatible player on your computer.
  • Conference Date and Time: 11-Mar-2010 10:38am ~ 12:21pm Pacific Standard Time
  • Duration of Recording: 1 Hour 39 Minutes
  • Recording File Size: 11.3 MB (in mp3 format)
  • suggestion: its best that you listen to the session while having the presentation opened in front of you. You'll be prompted to advance slides by the speaker.
  • Take a look, also, at the rich body of knowledge that this community has built together, over the years, by going through the archives of noteworthy past Ontolog events. (References on how to subscribe to our podcast can also be found there.)

For the record ...

How To Join (while the session is in progress)



Retrieved from "https://ontologforum.com/index.php?title=ConferenceCall_2010_03_11&oldid=320"