ppy/oor_chat-transcript_edited_20130528b.txt ------ Chat transcript from room: oor_20130528 2013-05-28 GMT-08:00 [PDT] ------ [8:26] PeterYim: welcome to the = OpenOntologyRepository: "Revisiting the OOR Strategy and Tactics" Discussion Session - Tue 2013_05_28 = session page: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OOR/ConferenceCall_2013_05_28 Attendees: PeterYim (co-chair), MikeDean (co-chair), BobSmith, LeoObrst, MichaelGruninger, MikeBennett, OliverKutz, TillMossakowski. == Proceedings: == [8:28] PeterYim: Hi Michael ... [8:37] PeterYim: == starting session with the slides ... http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OOR/ConferenceCall_2013_05_28#nid3TD6 [8:50] PeterYim: == our SWOT analysis ... [8:50] PeterYim: === "Strength": one (or two) top "value" you are gaining that makes you think the time you put into OOR is worth it [8:51] MichaelGruninger: collaboration opportunities ... coordination of our individual efforts with ontology repositories [8:51] MikeBennett: The potential for common, shared semantics for reuse in our standards efforts. [8:51] TillMossakowski: the decentralized service-based architecture [8:52] MikeDean: leading edge for anticipated future repository BAAs and other procurements [8:52] LeoObrst: When we first started, there were no ontology repositories, and in fact many thought there was no need. I think they are still absolutely necessary: for ontology and vocabulary mapping and interoperability, with supporting services. [8:52] PeterYim: potential of being part of an infrastructure initiative that creates a component which will fill a strategic gap for Ontology (as a technology and a discipline) to grow [9:00] PeterYim: out of curiosity ... was "mutual help to get funded" a value to people? [9:02] PeterYim: responses: ... useful for projects like: SOCoP, Ken, Till ... Michael (not so far, but later) [9:03] PeterYim: === "Weakness": if you had thought of quitting from OOR, what would have been the key reason(s) ... don't say "not enough time" though, as that is just a matter of priority ... provide the next granular-level response, "why is this not worth spending your precious time on?" [9:05] PeterYim: it is not making the kind of impact I would have hoped it will (at least not so far) [9:06] LeoObrst: Too slow progress relative to other efforts: Ontology Summit, Earth Science - Ontology series, many work projects. [9:06] MikeDean: limited direct return on investment so far [9:06] MichaelGruninger: lack of progress on common architecture [9:06] MikeBennett: If we weren't producing our ontologies in OWL (which we now are); if we could not find suitably reusable, standards-based ontologies (which we haven't really looked for); or if my management were not aware of OOR because it's down in the weeds from their perspective and they don't really know what it adds to my deliverables bottom line. [9:07] TillMossakowski: there has been no implementation apart from BioPortal (and even the OOR modifications of BioPortal are trivial). I think OOR's top-down approach for software implementation does not work. [9:14] PeterYim: ==== what is the one thing that the team could do to mitigate the issue you cited above [9:17] LeoObrst: Joint funding would help. Also, perhaps we should position OOR as providing plugin services to BioPortal, e.g., rather than trying to do it all. [9:17] MichaelGruninger: perhaps try a bottom-up approach, where we address the OOR issues in the context of our individual projects, and then come together to identify how we can best coordinate work, share ideas, and reuse implementations [9:17] MikeDean: identifying a qualified funding opportunity [9:23] LeoObrst: Following on Mike Dean's comments: some of us had hoped that big science NSF efforts such as EarthCube would show the need for ontology repositories, and thereby push some funding. [9:17] TillMossakowski: funding will help, we need more resources for ontology development and implementation [9:17] MikeBennett: If the OOR repository contained the standard ontologies we would use as a key part of our shared semantics strategy. And made some contribution to how those are accessed / referenced etc. [9:17] PeterYim: to increase OOR's impact: get into one of two domains where OOR will the default place for those people to find their ontologies (like what BioPortal is doing for the biomedical informatics domain.) [9:25] MikeBennett: One or two domains: ontologies based in law, commerce and accounting would provide many of our building blocks. Also real estate, construction. [9:26] LeoObrst: I don't think a domain focus will help. I think BioPortal is not bound to just biomedical ontologies. [9:34] PeterYim: domain possibilities: SOCoP (geospatial), OntologyBasedStandards, Finance (FIBO, accounting, legal, real estate), Academic Papers (Gruninger ...) [9:41] PeterYim: Till: we are focusing on a couple of domains too: SpacePortal, ConceptPortal, (similar to BioPortal) [9:37] anonymous morphed into BobSmith [9:41] PeterYim: === "Opportunity": given what we have now, what is the one (or two) thing we can do that would allow OOR to make a huge (at least meaningful) impact [9:44] MikeBennett: Make the published standards ontologies available that have wide application e.g. W3C Organization, as they become available. And make their status, usage clear and accessible. [9:44] PeterYim: (as before) build domain focus and reach out to the domains ... in order of viability - Academic paper, Finance, Standards, ... [9:44] LeoObrst: Unsure really. Maybe provide services for some of the Ontology Summit ontology evaluation tools, vocabulary->ontology mapping service, enhanced ontology/vocabulary versioning service. [10:01] TillMossakowski: we will provide ontology mapping and versioning on Ontohub soon (before Sept.) [9:45] MichaelGruninger: content that will be used by multiple users and communities [9:45] BobSmith: BIM (Building Information Modeling and resulting models) are at the heart of city sustainability thinking- and some OOR efforts have been going on (IN Germany, esp.) for several years. Simply need better awareness between those doing BIM OOR and those needing BIM OOR... [9:45] PeterYim: (a totally separate idea that came out of the OntologySummit2013 postmortem session) tackle: what we could do to enable/improve "Reasoning over the LOD Cloud" [9:45] TillMossakowski: come up with software tools that help in the daily ontology development and maintenance work [9:45] MikeDean: Identifying a significant corpus of ontologies that a community needs help navigating. In addition to standards, ontology design patterns might be a good candidate. [9:53] MikeDean: We could populate ODPs in OOR from http://ontologydesignpatterns.org [9:54] MikeDean: GaryBergCross and KrzysztofJanowicz have been advocating use of ODPs in SOCoP (and SOCoP OOR) for some time [9:48] MikeBennett: Can I suggest a second thing: ontology visualization, as an aid to people knowing what they can reuse and how. [9:46] MichaelGruninger: note from earlier: a student project will start in September to harvest ontologies from the journal and conference literature [9:53] MichaelGruninger: @Till: yes, the plan was to upload the ontologies to OntoHub [9:57] LeoObrst: Folks, I must leave at 1 pm. [9:57] TillMossakowski: me too [9:58] MikeDean: Perhaps there's a branding opportunity for an OntologyStore or OntStore, leveraging some of the current buzz over various AppStores in the mobile and (at least within government / DoD software procurement /) desktop space. [9:59] BobSmith: NOTE - Linked Open Data vs. Levels of Detail (of a BIM Model) [10:02] LeoObrst: Bye, folks! [10:04] PeterYim: Part-2 of this "Strategy-Tactics" session is now scheduled for Tue 2013.06.18 ... (MichaelGruninger will not be available on Jun-25) ... Thanks to agreement by TillMossakowski to swap their hackathon session date, the "OOR-Ontohub-Gatekeeper API" Hackathon Session (co-chairs: TillMossakowski & KenBaclawski) will now be on Tue 2013.06.25 [10:06] PeterYim: great session ... thanks everyone for your input! ... I think the ideas support one another very well and viable solutions are emerging ... let's continue on Tue 2013.06.18 same time ... talk to you all then! (Note that there will be no OOR meeting on Jun-4 and Jun-11.) [10:06] PeterYim: -- session ended: 10:05am PDT -- ------