ppy/chat-transcript_unedited_20110419b.txt Chat transcript from room: ontology-summit-2011 2011-04-21 GMT-08:00 (time-stamps in PDT) [2:16] PeterYim: == Proceedings {Day-2 2011.04.19) == [2:17] PeterYim: . [3:51] PeterYim: Welcome to the = OntologySummit2011: April 18~19, 2011 Symposium = Theme: Ontology Summit 2011: Making the Case for Ontology 6th in the series of a 3-month annual event by and for the Ontology Community. This Summit is co-organized by Ontolog, NIST, NCOR, NCBO, IAOA & NCO_NITRD Ontology Summit 2011: General Co-chairs: Dr. SteveRay & Dr. NicolaGuarino Ontology Summit 2011: Symposium Co-chairs: Dr. RamSriram & Dr. LeoObrst Please refer to agenda details at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011_Symposium Remote dial-in details are at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011/WorkshopRegistration#nid2PRY . [5:15] anonymous1 morphed into Guillaume Radde [5:56] RexBrooks: The volume on the phone is so low it is inaudible. [5:57] RexBrooks: By this time yesterday NIST had already set the audio volume levels. [6:11] RexBrooks: I like the revised communique very much. The shorter sentences create a smoother flow. Of course nothing is perfect. There is a typo (missing "y" in interoperability) near the end of the first paragraph of the concluding Summary: "...and interoperabilit and integration." [6:13] anonymous1 morphed into Gary Berg-Cross [6:14] anonymous1 morphed into MatthewWest [6:23] RexBrooks: Did we lose audio? [6:23] Eric Hanson: i did as well [6:23] Eric Hanson: I dropped the call called back in and still have nothing [6:24] Brand Niemann (Semantic Community): No audio! [6:24] Brand Niemann (Semantic Community): I just called back in and still no audio! [6:24] RexBrooks: Apparently we need someone in the room to notice the chat. [6:24] Eric Hanson: i have George's cell [6:25] anonymous1 morphed into Marcy Harris [6:25] RexBrooks: Could it be that there was background noise over the phone line and Peter decided to mute all lines and that muted the NIST line too? [6:26] BobSmith: It has been 3 minutes....is audio back? [6:26] Eric Hanson: no [6:26] RexBrooks: Not yet. [6:32] Brand Niemann (Semantic Community): I just heard a voice say "the moderator has just disconnected" [6:33] vnc2: did we lose audio for the remote participants? [6:33] RexBrooks: yes! 5 + minutes ago! [6:34] vnc2: hang on ... trying to fix situation now [6:34] RexBrooks: I dialed back in after the message that the moderator had disconnected, but still no sound. [6:34] SteveRay: Rex, do you have audio now? [6:34] RexBrooks: No [6:34] SteveRay: Ok, hold on, av is dialing back in [6:35] RexBrooks: Thanks. [6:35] doug foxvog: The linked to Wisnosky wmv video is password protected [6:36] SteveRay: Rex, are you on the phone? [6:36] RexBrooks: Yes. No sound. [6:37] SteveRay: Hmm, NIST dialed in, but don't hear anyone on the line [6:37] doug foxvog: The quicktime video, , is also password protected [6:37] RexBrooks: I'll call back in again. [6:37] SteveRay: Ok [6:38] SteveRay: Peter, did you mute the NIST line? [6:38] vnc2: yes [6:38] RexBrooks: Called back in and there's sound. [6:39] SteveRay: Can you unmute it? [6:39] RexBrooks: Hi all, you can call back in now, but please mute your phones so that no extra sound bothers the conference attendees. [6:40] RexBrooks: "*2"=mute, "*3"=unmute. [6:40] RexBrooks: And you can mute your own phones. [6:41] RexBrooks: Just remember to unmute when its time to speak. [6:41] doug foxvog: What is the password for access to the Wisnosky videos? [6:45] Mike Pool: video pw: popcorn [6:56] MikeRiben: is he talking about slide 1? [6:57] Eric Hanson1: slides? cant find the link. [6:57] MikeRiben: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2011/2011-04-18_19_OntologySummit2011_Symposium/OntologySummit2011-presentation--DennisWisnosky_20110419.pdf [6:58] Eric Hanson1: thanks Mike [7:02] RexBrooks: Thanks Mr. Wisnosky, as someone who occasionally toils in the interface between DoDAF Metamodel 2.x and SOA, specifically OASIS Reference Architecture Foundation for SOA, its good to see such foundational requirements moving into place to advance the whole process! Darn, maybe I'm not just whistling in the wind! [7:58] anonymous2: Rex - good idea - I hear you whistling [7:59] anonymous2 morphed into BobSmith [8:04] SteveRay: Sound on the phone OK? [8:06] RexBrooks: Yes,thanks. [8:30] RexBrooks: Volume is trailing off to inaudible again. Can't tell if its a speaker with a soft voice or the microphone is out of range. [8:32] RexBrooks: When this happens we lose track of the thread of discussion. In this case it faded out when the permathread of using or not using the "O" word fired up. [8:32] anonymous2 morphed into DeborahMacPherson [8:33] RexBrooks: Since most of us have heard this before ad infinitum, I don't think we're missing much, but it does appear to be a microphone setting that is sliding toward the low end. [8:35] MikeRiben: I think it will help if explained properly [8:36] RexBrooks: +1 for John, who is audible. [8:37] RexBrooks: Maybe we need speakers to get close to the microphone? [8:38] MikeRiben: what slide deck? [8:39] LeoObrst: We're on Michael Gruninger's slides. [8:40] MikeRiben: found them with refresh [9:22] RexBrooks: I don't think we can expect Use-Cases to publish their ontologies unless those ontologies are already public as in standards which include or which are in themselves ontologies. [9:24] RexBrooks: This is especially true to proprietary ontologies which serve to translate SPARQL queries of clients' relational databases into executable SQL statements, especially of the consecutive dependent WHERE clauses. [9:25] RexBrooks: And that's entirely separate from IPR considerations. [9:27] RexBrooks: Also there is the danger of providing sufficient information which allows competitors to reverse engineer your work. [9:28] RexBrooks: Are we going to save discussion of the revised communique till this afternoon? [9:29] RexBrooks: While there's a lot traffic in the email list about it, little if any of it appears here in the chat. [11:30] RexBrooks: The problem with automated extraction is finding a way to reach a sweet spot in terms of common agreement for how terms can be mapped to similar terms so that anyone's automation tool can have its results work interoperably with almost all others. [11:35] RexBrooks: Good point. Data at rest is now the exception, hearkening back to yesterday's discussion of provenance and temporality. [11:41] RexBrooks: It's a shame we can't always have our experts, evangelists and fresh minds as we take all this back to our various constituencies to pass it along. Fortunately, we have developed a wealth of materials to use. [11:52] RexBrooks: Please consider this entry in the chat log to constitute my signature designating my support of this year's communique.-Rex Brooks [12:33] LeoObrst: Thank you, remote folks, for participating in the Ontology Summit Symposium! [12:34] RexBrooks: thank you too, and everyone who worked on this. [12:43] RexBrooks: I'd like to thank Cory for the invitation. I'm not sure there is a good place; e.g. an organization, where this can be done, let alone OMG, which is highly restricted. However, I wish him well. I think they should work out the problem description more completely first. [12:45] RexBrooks: I use UML all the time, specifically Enterprise Architect, though less by choice than by requirement. Regardless, I use it, so I'm familiar with it. I dpm [12:47] RexBrooks: don't have to use the ODM, yet, so I haven't explored it. A Unified Profile for Ontology could be a good thing which would stay securely in the OMG conrext. But. regardless, I would rather see an improved XMI that is genuinely interoperable across the current vendors than creating a new modeling language. [12:50] RexBrooks: That would handle most datamodeling I have to do. [12:53] RexBrooks: I'm afraid I am getting a bit too tired to hang in here for the Fact Guru discussion, though I wish I could. [13:18] alex: where are the presentations? I mean the urls for the presentations we are hearing [13:20] RexBrooks: DSkuce: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2011/2011-04-18_19_OntologySummit2011_Symposium/FactGuru-Presentation--DougSkuce_20110419.pdf [13:20] RexBrooks: We're on page/slide 9 [13:20] alex: thnaks [13:21] RexBrooks: My pleasure. Even tired, I can't make myself quit. [13:23] RexBrooks: This all sounds very much like Compendium with a concept extractor. Could be combined with Compendium to build a more complete knowledge base. [13:24] RexBrooks: Still takes a lot of understanding up front before being able to use after it gets properly up and running. [13:24] RexBrooks: But it's a good start. [13:26] alex: true [13:27] alex: one usually starts by the terminology [13:27] alex: then moves on to relationships. [13:27] alex: axioms etc [13:27] RexBrooks: "twould be nice to combine this with Compendium and SRI's Cognitive Assitant that Learns and Organizes (CALO). However I would still like to have the inference-able knowledge base take either SPARQL or SQL queries from a natural language interface and output results in any form or notation or language. [13:44] alex: how is this different from an RDF based database for which I could use sparql? [13:47] RexBrooks: Do you mean FactGuru or what I was describing? [13:47] alex: factguru [13:50] alex: mmmm I dont see how [13:50] alex: this tool is far behind what u can do with linked data [13:50] alex: this smells like an RDF db... [13:50] RexBrooks: However, the difference between what I described and an RDF DB is that you can translate SPARQL into a series of SQL queries and use an existing database that a potential client already has while retaining the relationships inherent in an ontologically unified db, e.g. and RDF DB, which may only be the first stage of a more ontologically unified knowledgebase. What is being described is not necessarily capable, as I am understanding it of being used by someone who needs an RDF DB. [13:51] alex: if this depends on mappings it is not practical [13:51] RexBrooks: What John is saying is that it can indeed be used by the RDF DB. [13:52] RexBrooks: Sort of depends on how many mappings and how close to the original a translation may be. [13:53] RexBrooks: So it can do 5-ary relationships. [14:00] Simon Spero: Pentuples - protect against demons [14:01] Simon Spero: CF: http://attempto.ifi.uzh.ch/site/ [14:03] Simon Spero: (also: https://launchpad.net/acewiki/ ) [14:09] RexBrooks: Thanks Simon, will have to read later. Eyes burning now. Soon must tune out. ---