ConferenceCall 2009 05 14

 (slightly edited for clarity)     (1XLW)
 VNC2: Welcome to the OntologySummit2009: Follow-up and Action Planning Call - Thu 2009-05-14
       OntologySummit2009 postmortem and follow-up planning conference call 
       Chair: Dr. SteveRay    (1XLX)
 VNC2: Please refer to session details at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2009_05_14    (1XLY)
 anonymous1 morphed into BaharehHeravi    (1XLZ)
 PeterYim: will " anonymous" participants please morph into their WikiWord-name-based identity by clicking on the "Settings" button (at top center)    (1XM0)
 anonymous1 morphed into DavidLeal    (1XM1)
 anonymous morphed into DennisThomas    (1XM2)
 anonymous2 morphed into FrankChum    (1XM3)
 anonymous3 morphed into LinePouchard    (1XM4)
 anonymous4 morphed into KurtConrad    (1XM5)
 anonymous6 morphed into DavidPrice    (1XM6)
 anonymous1 morphed into GeraldRadack    (1XM7)
 anonymous5 morphed into BillMcCarthy    (1XM8)
 anonymous7 morphed into MarkCarlisle    (1XM9)
 anonymous2: THis is Duane - how do I morph?    (1XMA)
 anonymous morphed into PatHayes    (1XMB)
 PatHayes: Duane: hit Settings, at top.    (1XMC)
 anonymous2 morphed into DuaneNickull    (1XMD)
 DuaneNickull: thanks    (1XME)
 MikeBennett: BillNichols sends apologies    (1XMF)
 anonymous morphed into BrandNiemann    (1XMG)
 anonymous morphed into DougHolmes    (1XMH)
 anonymous1 morphed into DavidCoggeshall    (1XMI)
 PatHayes morphed into PatHayes    (1XMJ)
 PatHayes: (ref. the Communique wording ... end first paragraph)  I still have problems 
           with this wording. "..., as illustrated..."can be read as a restriction, 
           meaning "as opposed to others we do not mention."  Why not put a stop 
           after 'to standards', and have the illustrations in a separate sentence.    (1XMK)
 MikeBennett: Units as a concept also needs to be able to deal with monetary units and so on 
              - whether as part of the physical units ontology or in a wider framework.    (1XML)
 PatHayes: How do I re-mute myself?    (1XMM)
 PeterYim: " *2 " to mute your phone again    (1XMN)
 PatHayes: tnx    (1XMO)
 anonymous1 morphed into KatherineGoodier    (1XMP)
 MikeBennett: Note that under the Financial heading there are 2 things: 
              The EDM Council Semantics Repository which I can happily 
              provide regular reports on; and the more aspirational 
              agenda item from Bill Nichols, though I assume he would be 
              able to provide updates, but it's not "an ontology" as the 
              EDMCouncil repository is    (1XMQ)
 SteveRay: Discussion and a quick poll on which mailing list we should use, 
           for our "ontology-based standards" discussion, going forward    (1XN4)
 PatHayes: I would strongly support having a separate list. 
           The general forum is already overloaded.    (1XMR)
 DeborahMacPherson: ontologies and standards list is fine with me, there is 
                    too much traffic on ontolog proper    (1XMS)
 HowardMason: Concur - we need to separate theoretical discussions from practical developments    (1XMT)
 KatherineGoodier: I think it went better than in previous years.  We are getting 
                   much better at this.  Peter has great pictures of most of us already!    (1XMU)
 PavithraKenjige: Facebook    (1XMV)
 GeraldRadack: We could actually use Facebook, rather than trying to duplicate it on the Wiki.    (1XMW)
 PavithraKenjige: use facebook    (1XMX)
 PatHayes: Laurent: agreed this is a nice idea. I can make a webpage if people 
           can send me their photos. But using facebook is a neat idea.    (1XMY)
 MikeBennett: Linked-in is Facebook for grown-ups    (1XMZ)
 LinePouchard: Facebook is fine with me    (1XN0)
 PavithraKenjige: Okay... we can post a picture!    (1XN1)
 MikeBennett: Can yoiu clarify what Yes means?    (1XN2)
 LinePouchard: I got overloaded with the theoretical discussions, 
               separating them from practical discussions seemed interesting.    (1XN3)
 PeterYim: for onward discussion using a new list - vote count 18    (1XN5)
 PeterYim: for onward discussion using the existing [ontolog-forum] list - vote count 3    (1XN6)
 PeterYim: I'll set up a new list to handle the discussion then 
           (give me a few days to get that done)    (1XN7)
 PeterYim: note that Ontolog should just be a "good conversation" 
           (in John Seely Brown's sense of a "community of practice") 
           ... real project should be executed in more appropriate 
           settings like ISO, OASIS, W3C, etc.    (1XN8)
 DavidPrice: Quarterly update telecon sounds like a good idea.    (1XN9)
 LinePouchard: What Peter suggested seems a good idea.  Not everyone want 
               to follow every project    (1XNB)
 LinePouchard: I referred to having several quarterly Tcons where 
               projects are distributed, as reviewing all projects 
               in one Tcon seems too much.    (1XND)
 anonymous1 morphed into PatCassidy    (1XNA)
 BillMcCarthy: If we set up a separate financial list, ISO/IEC 15944-4 
               (the Open-edi accounting & economic ontology (REA-based) 
               is definitely interested in working with MikeBennett and others.    (1XNC)
 PatHayes: Bill, can you put me on the Cc list for news of that topic? 
           Thanks.  phayes[at]ihmc.us    (1XNE)
 MikeBennett: @Bill: great news    (1XNF)
 MikeBennett: @Bill we should talk about this more off line    (1XNG)
 PatHayes: pass on my comment, it was only an endorsement of 
           Peter's comment on the role of ontolog.    (1XNH)
 PeterYim: we hope every project will maintain a project-page 
           on the Ontolog Wiki ... and point us to their work site 
           (say at an ISO WG, OASIS TC, etc.)    (1XNI)
 MikeBennett: Thanks for the reminder Peter. Are there any 
              special requirements for how we do that or is just 
              a matter of creating a new page?    (1XNJ)
 PeterYim: @ MikeBennett: there is an (optional) project page 
           template that one can use as a reference - 
           see: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nidK    (1XNK)
 MikeBennett: Thanks, will do that    (1XNL)
 PeterYim: for those who need a collaborative work environment (CWE) 
           for their project, Ontolog will be happy to incubate 
           the project (on the Ontolog-CWE) while they look for 
           a "home" for their project(s)    (1XNM)
 KatherineGoodier: Can we all indicate which standards we are 
                   interested in using our edit ability to this page?    (1XNN)
 FrankChum: Katherine, I'm interested in Ontology and Standards for Oil and Gas.    (1XNO)
 KatherineGoodier: Thanks, Frank.  I will start a little table for our meeting notes....    (1XNP)
 DavidLeal: Katherine, I'm interested in Oil and Gas and Units    (1XNQ)
 KatherineGoodier: Thanks David!    (1XNR)
 LinePouchard: Katherine:  I am interested in Connecting ISO/IEC 11179 
               to data sets and geospatial Catalog mediation.    (1XNS)
 KatherineGoodier: Thanks Line!    (1XNT)
 SteveRay: Question: what topic would you suggest for next year's summit?    (1XNU)
 FrankChum: Since there are a lot of interests recently on UOM, may I suggest 
            upper ontology as a topic for next year's summit conference?    (1XNV)
 MikeBennett: Agree with upper ontology and /or foundational ontology, 
              ontology framework and all that (including what those terms 
              mean and what's useful)    (1XNW)
 FrankChum: Topic for next year: Business Cases and Use Cases    (1XNX)
 PeterYim: topic for the next summit (this was first proposed by BarrySmith 
           after OntologySummit2008 - education and training 
           (to give the world more) ontologists    (1XNY)
 FrankChum: Upper Ontology as standards    (1XNZ)
 MichaelGruninger: Collecting use cases (semantic integration, decision support, 
                   search) that demonstrate the benefit of ontologies to 
                   ontology-skeptics    (1XO0)
 PatHayes: +1 to MichaelGruninger's idea. We need some evidential support 
           for any thesis (such as the utility of an 'upper ontology') 
           before trying to convince others of it. Right now we have 
           little more than religious fervor for most of these topics, seems to me.    (1XO1)
 PatCassidy: One possibility for next year's summit is the use of ontologies 
             in natural language processing tasks.  I think this is important 
             because from what I have seen thus far, any complex ontology 
             will be very hard to use without a good NL interface to the ontology.  
             A well-functioning interface will be both a tool to make an ontology 
             easier to use and a demonstration of how it can be used.  The interface 
             could implement a controlled English, using a vocabulary of a 
             few thousand words.    (1XO2)
 FrankChum: Michael, ditto    (1XO3)
 MikeBennett: Sorry, got to drop off for another call    (1XO4)
 PeterYim: bye, Mike .. thanks for coming!    (1XO5)
 LaurentLiscia: My own experience is that there are very few ontology skeptics - 
                mostly people who know nothing about ontologies.    (1XO6)
 LaurentLiscia: Adoption is key - and we're not talking about "marketing" somehow. 
                Or popularization. These are dreded but critical words.    (1XO7)
 PatHayes: @Laurent: my experience is the opposite. BUt in any case we must be 
           very careful not to oversell, to risk a backlash. Anyone with 
           an AI background knows the horror stories of the AI winter. 
           FWIW, I am something of an ontology skeptic myself.    (1XO8)
 PavithraKenjige: Unless you have business use case one can have do the roi    (1XO9)
 FrankChum: People seeing use cases can spark ideas of how they would use ontology 
            in their own environment.    (1XOA)
 DuaneNickull: agree    (1XOB)
 DuaneNickull: the interface has to be easy to understand.  In 1997 we developed 
               a natural language interface similar to the wolfram alpha one for GoXML.  
               users loved being able to ask questions like 
               "find me a {noun} {that is} a {ontology concept}.    (1XOC)
 DavidPrice: This conversation no longer has any value. Steve ... suggest stopping it for now.    (1XOD)
 LaurentLiscia: I have to drop off - but @ PatHayes: I'm noticing that 
                we are raising the issue of AI again. And I would argue 
                that this is not a dirty acronym. It was a winter for 
                a lot of reasons - but now it's Spring    (1XOE)
 LaurentLiscia: Toodaloo.    (1XOF)
 FrankChum: Topic: Getting Ontology into the Mainstream ... (Peter)    (1XOG)
 PatHayes: A topic might be >>barriers to ontology use<<, which allows 
           discussion of use cases and also attempts to give 
           more general analyses of issues of applying ontologies 
           in practice. Even Pat C.'s topic might fit in there    (1XOH)
 DeborahMacPherson: Need to sign off - will look for the new list and thanks!    (1XOI)
 FrankChum: A more positive language would be preferred    (1XOJ)
 PeterYim: I suggest we pick our Summit topic in terms of its "strategic" value 
           to our agenda, which, for Ontolog (although Ontolog is not the 
           only organizer) is to "to advancing the field of ontology, 
           ontological engineering and semantic technology, and advocating 
           their adoption into mainstream applications and international standards."    (1XOK)
 MichaelGruninger: I like PatHayes' suggestion.    (1XOL)
 DavidPrice: I like PatHayes' suggestion too. I also like the use of the word "barriers".    (1XOM)
 DavidPrice: That also lays the basis for future summits ... to address longer term barriers.    (1XON)
 PeterYim: +1 on PatHayes' suggestion    (1XOO)
 FrankChum: How about overcoming barriers    (1XOP)
 PatHayes: Sign off.    (1XOQ)
 KurtConrad: That was "naturalist decision making"?    (1XOR)
 PatHayes: Naturalistic decision making (NDM)    (1XOS)
 KurtConrad: Thanks, Pat    (1XOT)
 DavidPrice: What are we going to do any time soon on Units? 
             Can we set up a telecon to follow-up soon?    (1XOU)
 FrankChum: signing off... Thanks everyone!    (1XOV)
 DavidLeal: Michel Bohms has offered to host a registry of units ontology 
            activities on http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/w3pm/wiki/Main_Page. 
            This could be a good idea with information about status, 
            scope and ambitions.    (1XOW)
 DuaneNickull: thanks everyone!    (1XOX)
 KatherineGoodier: So long all    (1XOY)
 LinePouchard: thank you all    (1XOZ)
 SteveRay: Thank you all for your participation.    (1XP0)
 PeterYim: thank you ... meeting adjourned 12:09pm PDT    (1XP1)
    = session adjourned: 12:09pm PDT =    (1XL3)
 --
 notes taken by: PeterYim / 2009.05.14-12:10 PDT; 
 All participants, please review and edit to enhance accuracy and granularity of the documented proceedings.    (1XKL)

ConferenceCall 2009 05 14

OntologySummit2009: Follow-up and Action Planning Call - Thu 2009-05-14 (1WYD)

Conference Call Details: (1WYI)

Attendees (1WZ7)

Agenda Ideas: (1WZF)

Resources: (1XKA)

Agenda & Proceedings: (1WZL)

Transcript of the online chat during the session: (1XLV)

Audio Recording of this Session: (1XKM)

How To Join (while the session is in progress) (1XKF)

Your Visited Pages

View Backlinks

Wiki Search