Actions

Ontolog Forum

Revision as of 16:37, 8 May 2016 by imported>KennethBaclawski
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Ontology Summit 2016 Communiqué - Thu 2016-05-05

Session Co-Chairs: Michael Gruninger and Donna Fritzsche

Abstract

In this session, we complete the Summit Communiqué and handle logistics for the Symposium.

Agenda

Conference Call Details

  • Date: Thursday, 05-May-2016
  • Start Time: 9:30am PDT / 12:30pm EDT / 6:30pm CEST / 5:30pm BST / 1630 UTC
  • Expected Call Duration: ~2 hours
  • Dial-in:
    • 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 ... 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. ... (ref.)
  • In-session chat-room url: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/summit_20160505
    • 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) summit_20160505@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 gruninger@mie.utoronto.ca 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.)
  • This session, like all other Ontolog events, is open to the public. Information relating to this session is shared on this wiki page.
  • 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

Proceedings

[12:23] MichaelGruninger: Agenda:

1. Symposium Logistics Issues

2. Discussion of Communique comments

3. Discussion of Final Recommendations in Communique

[12:34] Mark Underwood: Registration count is currently 28

[12:35] LeoObrst:

Logistics:

  • Will NSF provide a computer for the podium, with web access to Ontolog for slides?
  • I am bringing my laptop, so can use that as backup for the first day. However, I won't be physically present the second day.
  • Anyone else bringing a laptop, as backup? Who?
  • If you will have slides, these will be due Sunday. Please send to Judith and me.
  • We will provide the slides to Ken Baclawski for installation on Ontolog. Ken, will you be attending the Symposium? We will have these to you Sunday.
  • If anyone wants to attend a Symposium dinner on Monday night, please coalesce, send your likelihood of attending. We won't make a reservation, unless many folks are interested. In past years, the dinner was held at a restaurant in the same NSF building. Maybe that will do this year? Neither Judith nor I will be attending the dinner, unfortunately.
  • Is anyone bringing breakfast/break provisions? In past years, Ram brought or we accepted donations. However, reservations may need to be made with the caterer. Judith/Ram: let's confirm, maybe check with Fouad.
  • We will send out a notice to all Thursday night/Friday morning, including to invited speakers and panelists, along with co-chairs, co-champions, to send their slides to us by Sunday.
  • Also send Fouad the list of registered participants.

[12:37] Russ: RSVP for the dinner Monday night

[12:39] Russ: Yes Front Page is the correct name.

[12:39] Gary Berg-Cross: For lunch there is a Food Court across the street from NSF.

[12:40] AndreaWesterinen: Rebecca Tauber and I will go to dinner.

[12:40] Mark Underwood: Fouad's address?

[12:40] AndreaWesterinen: Judith's email?

[12:40] Gary Berg-Cross: They will probably have room info at the desk where we must check in.

[12:42] Gary Berg-Cross: Fouda's emails is ramia@nitrd.gov tele 703-292-8128

[12:42] Mark Underwood: thx Gary

[12:43] RaviSharma: Gary and Andrea, FYI there is a Japanese restaurant in the same building as the Summit and also there is a Mexican restaurant across Wilson Blvd, in addition to the Mall food court, and I am sitting in CA and will not be there.

[12:43] Gary Berg-Cross: Last time I was there the Japanese restaurant had closed.

[12:45] FrankOlken: Do we need to register if attending via teleconference?

[12:46] FrankOlken: Yes, the Japanese restaurant closed a year ago.

[12:48] FrankOlken: The Mexican restaurant on Wilson also closed. There is one on Fairfax, North and West of NSF.

[12:49] RaviSharma: Frank - thanks for update - sorry they are closed, what about Il Forno Italian new one on Wilson?

[12:50] Russ: Not sure

[12:50] Mark Underwood: You are on it Russ

[12:52] FrankOlken: Eva Zanzerkia at NSF has email of ezanzerk@nsf.gov

[12:55] MichaelGruninger: 2. Discussion of Communique comments

[12:55] MichaelGruninger: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MEwdrM2bD6KV2D5NhCvk35bpkEikBkGxajRv0vt05Vk/edit#

[12:55] RaviSharma: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MEwdrM2bD6KV2D5NhCvk35bpkEikBkGxajRv0vt05Vk/edit#

[12:58] RaviSharma: terminology

noun: terminology; plural noun: terminologies

The body of terms used with a particular technical application in a subject of study, theory, profession, etc.

"the terminology of semiotics"

synonyms: phraseology, terms, expressions, words, language, lexicon, parlance, vocabulary, wording, nomenclature; More

[12:58] RaviSharma: So vocabulary and terminology mean the same

[12:59] RaviSharma: Todd - FYI.

[12:59] Donna Fritzsche: I like intended meaning - and interpretation as pat said

[12:59] Donna Fritzsche: General Comments - place below

[13:00] MichaelGruninger: Ravi: missing references

[13:01] Donna Fritzsche: We should make a general statement that references will be added - for clarity sake and to insure that we will be doing so.

[13:03] Donna Fritzsche: Too many sections?

[13:03] Donna Fritzsche: section numbers?

[13:05] ToddSchneider: Vocabulary - the body of words used in a particular language.

Terminology - the body of terms used with a particular technical application in a subject of study, theory, profession

[13:05] Russ: Thanks Mark. I have to check out. Look forward to meeting people in DC.

[13:10] Donna Fritzsche: cloud services add new functionality/options w/r to ontologies

[13:10] PatCassidy: In the "upper ontology" section I would like to add a comment to the effect that an upper ontology may be designed as an interlingua to **translate** among more specialized ontologies. That is the goal toward which COSMO is being developed. Can a comment like this be added in this section?

[13:11] Donna Fritzsche: API first cloud services is the defacto for Software design

[13:11] Donna Fritzsche: dominante design pattern. How we utilize this?

[13:11] Donna Fritzsche: We need to work with defacto technologies

[13:13] FrankOlken: Under upper ontologies we should also mention SUMO by Adam Please (Suggested Upper Merged Ontology).

[13:13] Donna Fritzsche: Team - we can only spend 10 minutes per topic - in order to get thru them all.

[13:14] Donna Fritzsche: cloud service is 1 exemplar of continuous computing

[13:14] MichaelGruninger: @FrankOlken: agreed. I added it

[13:14] Donna Fritzsche: Why cloud is so dominant in the Design Paradigm

[13:15] Ram Sriram: Regarding CLoud: We need to be careful here. Our discussion should be limited to Ontology issues, as related to Cloud and not general cloud discussions.

[13:16] Mark Underwood: Ack'd Donna and I will collab on the rehash for Cloud Service APIs

[13:17] FrankOlken: I think we may want to mention some problems arising from incorrect semantic integration, e.g., incorrect unit conversions, incorrect aggregation.

[13:18] RaviSharma: Leo - great comment.

[13:19] Mark Underwood: Ram + Judith - Rec'd acknowledgement of current reg list from Fouad

[13:19] Donna Fritzsche: Educational workshops

[13:20] Donna Fritzsche: Tutorials, hands-on practice, hands on camps, mixed team, collaboration

[13:20] RaviSharma: Also Manufacturing and Healthcare related comments are interspersed.

[13:20] RaviSharma: Todd- ontology, SI in particular and also what Leo said.

[13:22] RaviSharma: Todd - yes important but here it is relevant to identify gap and indicate possible funding mechanisms.

[13:22] Donna Fritzsche: re Funding: not enough dedicated to the educational aspects. Lessons learned (post project).

[13:22] Donna Fritzsche: Examples..

[13:23] Donna Fritzsche: Small and manageable examples . Reference ontologies, bridging vocabs

[13:23] Donna Fritzsche: focus on user communities is one option.

[13:23] Donna Fritzsche: Confrences would be a good place to offer workshops

[13:24] Donna Fritzsche: Conferences in related disciplines, that is.

[13:24] Gary Berg-Cross: Include an educational component in grants, particularly to leverage what has been learned.

[13:24] Donna Fritzsche: American Medical Informatics offers this

[13:24] RaviSharma: All- Sometimes but we did have some POCs and demos and some of these could be converted to UTube or other format of Tutorials?

[13:24] Gary Berg-Cross: ESIP may do some of this domain education.

[13:25] Gary Berg-Cross: Among the training might be how to use ontology repositories.

[13:25] Donna Fritzsche: top 4 comments per person - discuss. 5 minutes per topic

[13:26] LeoObrst: Mark: send me the registration list too. Thanks!

[13:27] Mark Underwood: *Leo Done

[13:28] Donna Fritzsche: we had done some of gary's comments - but that got lost in editing of the SI section.

[13:29] Donna Fritzsche: make getting the right mix - more introductory in nature

[13:29] LeoObrst: @Frank: yes, there is a great range of upper/foundational ontologies: DOLCE, SUMO, BFO, Upper Cyc, UFO, GFO, ETC. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_ontology.

[13:30] Donna Fritzsche: add text to address framing and ecosystem

[13:32] Donna Fritzsche: independent elements that come togheter in a dynamic manner to afford functionality and address hetereogenity

[13:33] Mark Underwood: Some contributors to the semantic interop white paper that I'm working on with Paul Murdock et al. is using ecosystem also; this is a useful coincidence

[13:33] Mark Underwood: (con'd) that is IoT focused

[13:35] Donna Fritzsche: local meanings vs pattern meaning. the ability to adapt to local needs based on core patterns

[13:35] Donna Fritzsche: a little piece of the ecosystem idea.

[13:35] Donna Fritzsche: Semantic drift is a challenge

[13:36] Mark Underwood: This is another reason to use adopt ecosystem: http://www.software.ac.uk/ "Software Sustainability Institute"

[13:36] Donna Fritzsche: scale

[13:36] Donna Fritzsche: thanks mark

[13:37] Gary Berg-Cross: Sorry I have to go. Will be able to see the chat tonight or when posted...and see some of you on Monday.

[13:37] RaviSharma: Todd - good point on spatio- temporal and thing aspects

[13:38] Mark Underwood: Safe travels Gary

[13:38] TerryLongstreth: Sorry I haven't been able to contribute more this year. I'll see you Monday.

[13:40] Donna Fritzsche: add meaning (intended interpreation)

[13:40] RaviSharma: Michael - link for published 2007 version if easily available.

[13:40] Donna Fritzsche: systems vs software applications..

[13:43] RaviSharma: Todd - I support use of "Information Systems". Donna - we hope to include practitioners heavily and not just IT and developers.

[13:44] Donna Fritzsche: Ravi- what is a practioner?

[13:44] ToddSchneider: Both domain

[13:45] Donna Fritzsche: bridge ontologies are more tactical, handshake, use case driven

[13:45] Donna Fritzsche: came out of discussions during the meetings

[13:46] ToddSchneider: So a bridge ontology is used operationally and developed nearer deployment time? As opposed to a reference ontology that are pre-existing?

[13:46] Donna Fritzsche: bridge ontologies are not an upper ontology. more mid-level

[13:46] Donna Fritzsche: pat - please add text for your comments to chat

[13:47] RaviSharma: Donna -practitioner is end user of ontology for reports products or results downstream

[13:48] Donna Fritzsche: so, for instance, a doctor or a bank regulator?

[13:48] ToddSchneider: Donna, Michael, Will you be updating the Google docs version as you make changes?

[13:48] Donna Fritzsche: yes

[13:48] ToddSchneider: Donna, yes to what? Updates to the Google docs version?

[13:48] Donna Fritzsche: add material on reuse

[13:49] Donna Fritzsche: yes, we will be updating the google docs version.

[13:49] ToddSchneider: Donna, Great. I won't need to stay up late on Sunday night.

[13:50] Mark Underwood: Reuse emphasis is a cloud services / API driver also

[13:50] Donna Fritzsche: - we might still be editing sunday nite (fyi)

[13:50] LeoObrst: Think of bridge ontology as an integration ontology C integrating ontologies A and B. C could be very simple, i.e., importing A and B and establishing equivalences (or other relations) between some A items and some B items.

[13:50] Donna Fritzsche: Andrea - can you summarize your comment in the chat

[13:51] Mark Underwood: Sorry, I broke it :)

[13:51] Donna Fritzsche: thanks Mark! :-)

[13:51] ToddSchneider: Leo, Your definition of bridge ontologies sound like how Bob Young described the reference ontologies he's involved with.

[13:52] Donna Fritzsche: Where does reuse fit in?

[13:52] Donna Fritzsche: Patterns

[13:53] ToddSchneider: Methods which facilitate semantic interoperability - first understand that semantics/interpretation are the problem.

[13:54] LeoObrst: @Todd: to me reference ontologies are kind of like the OBO ontologies, i.e., attempting to be a "complete" ontology over a specific domain, that applies to generic use cases, not necessarily ones specific to a particular application.

[13:55] LeoObrst: And so, even without direct use of an OBO ontology by a specific application, it still acts as a "reference" for humans working in that area.

[13:56] ToddSchneider: Leo, Okay. Your definition (of a reference ontology) suggests it's something like an upper ontology for a particular domain. Yes/no?

[13:56] AndreaWesterinen: Sorry, have to leave at 2pm.

[13:58] LeoObrst: @Yes, but it can be very specific, as some of the OBO ontologies are, e.g., mouse anatomy. Insofar as you can have lower, more specific mouse anatomy ontologies, then the former acts as an upper/super-domain ontology for a specific area.

[14:00] RaviSharma: Donna and Michael - our document has to be aware of Upper lower levels and also the bridge concept and mention where to choose what for SI among overlapping Domain Ontologies.

[14:00] Donna Fritzsche: Call to actions could be included in Final Recs

[14:00] Mark Underwood: I mention it in my section

[14:01] Donna Fritzsche: how ontologies could help linked data - semantic data lake

[14:02] Mark Underwood: Agree that Linked Data should get a mention

[14:03] Mark Underwood: "Semantic data lake" is a riff on Big Data lake

[14:04] Donna Fritzsche: yes - but it has a specific meaning for us.

[14:04] Donna Fritzsche: yes - agreed ravi -

[14:04] Mark Underwood: @Donna, indeed, and I'm not sure the distinction was fully made - right now MDM owns that space

[14:04] Donna Fritzsche: data lakes that have been filtered through semantics

[14:05] Donna Fritzsche: thus make them more interoperable

[14:05] Mark Underwood: AGree - the trad'l WH folks use it

[14:05] ToddSchneider: 'Semantic Data Lake' still a definition or at least some description of the intended interpretation.

[14:05] Mark Underwood: But they are going to think nosql / Hadoop, and that is a bit misleading

[14:07] Donna Fritzsche: agreed

[14:07] Donna Fritzsche: @ken

[14:07] Mark Underwood: +1 Ken suggests Open Qs become recomm

[14:09] Mark Underwood: Hard to know as always who the audience is!

[14:10] Donna Fritzsche: agreed Mark.

[14:11] PatCassidy: An approach to the most general form of semantic interoperability - to put information on the web in logical form and have it interpreted correctly by any other system - is to use a "foundation ontology" (a kind of "upper ontology") that has within it logical representations of all of the identifiable semantic primitives, that can be used in combination to create the logical specifications for any other concept used locally. This type of ontology can then serve as an "interlingua" to translate among any of the local ontologies whose elements have been specified as combinations of the foundation ontology elements. If a local ontology cannot find a semantic primitive required to properly specify some element(s) in it, those new primitives need to be added to the foundation ontology.

[14:11] Mark Underwood: Outside looking in to our CoI: You should use ontologies for sem interop b/c X Y Z

[14:12] Mark Underwood: Inside the CoI: how we can become insurgents in design patterns which currently ignore ontologies

[14:13] LeoObrst: Yes, insurgents!

[14:13] RaviSharma: Ravi's comment - on word Final to some other word - including, summary, recommendations are really also in best practices, open Q's and next steps could be grouped together.

[14:14] Donna Fritzsche: per MG "3 audiences: ontology geeks, ontology skeptics, people who think they are a good idea- but dont see how it works."

[14:15] Donna Fritzsche: I would industry and government decision makers

[14:15] Mark Underwood: Geeks | Skeptics | Middle ground (paraphrasing Michael) - the latter

[14:15] RaviSharma: Even though we are not mainstream, our intended audience are users who may or may not know how ontologies are helping them address their solutions, just as rules engines make solutions better, Michael's comments are also in same direction.

[14:16] Donna Fritzsche: per frank: call attention to citations of authoritative souces.

[14:16] Donna Fritzsche: per frank: within domains, there are different authoritative sources.

[14:16] Donna Fritzsche: @frank - please add to chat

[14:16] RaviSharma: Frank - like your comment.

[14:16] LeoObrst: @Frank: but you have both descriptive and prescriptive definitions.

[14:18] Mark Underwood: Frank - I was hunting for someone working on putting parts of SEC Rule 613 into ontology-usable format - see https://www.sec.gov/divisions/marketreg/rule613-info.htm - The Consolidated Audit Trail project is/was a major effort

[14:18] RaviSharma: Leo - prescriptive where user does not not how to use Ontologies let alone their SI?

[14:19] ToddSchneider: One impediment to semantic interoperability is recognizing it as the problem. Many times interoperability problems are ascribed to technical issues (i.e., syntactic). Subsequently, non-semantic solutions are sought or developed e.g., XML, controlled vocabularies). While such solutions may alleviate current problems, but their deficiencies become apparent over time as the original/initial interoperability problems reoccur.

[14:20] RaviSharma: thanks Donna Michael and all participants. I feel good about it, please do some editing on our comments and ideas by consulting your track champions..

[14:20] FrankOlken: Mention importance of annotating ontology definitions with citations to authoritative sources for definitions such as regulations, court decisions, legislation, etc. Such citations may be useful links in doing semantic integration.

Retrieved from "https://ontologforum.com/index.php?title=ConferenceCall_2016_05_05&oldid=3355"