Dear All, (01)
Here are the material from our 44th OntoIOp team conference call.
Kindly review and advise of any error, omission or edit. (02)
1. the audio archive for the (n.44) OntoIOp teleconference of Wed
2013.10.09 is now online: (03)
* Date: Wednesday 9-Oct-2013
* Meeting time: 1500 ~ 1551 UTC
* length/format/size: 0:44:39 , mp3 , 5.11 MB
* accessible directly as:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntoIOp/Team_confcall/2013-10-09_team-confcall_n.44/OntoIOp-n44_20131009b.mp3 (04)
3. The chat-transcript (lightly edited) is attached below, which is
also available as:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntoIOp/Team_confcall/2013-10-09_team-confcall_n.44/OntoIOp-confcall-n44_chat-transcript_20131009b.txt (05)
4. Our next regular team meetings will be at the same time, in two
weeks later (i.e. Wed 2013.09.25); same time (as today's call.) (06)
= OntoIOp team-confcall (n.45) - Wed 2013.10.23 = (07)
Date: Wed 23-Oct-2013
start-time: 8:00am PDT / 18:00 am EDT / 5:00pm CEST / 4:00pm BST /
0:00am [+1] KST / 15:00 UTC
* ref. world clock -
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=10&day=23&year=2013&hour=8&min=0&sec=0&p1=224
Duration: 1.0~1.5 Hrs.
* shared-file workspace:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntoIOp/Team_confcall/2013-10-23_team-confcall_n.45/
* chat-workspace: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/ontoiop_20131023 (08)
Please mark your calendars. (09)
Regards. =ppy
-- (010)
------ <OntoIOp-confcall-n44_chat-transcript_20131009b.txt> ------ (011)
------
Chat transcript from room: ontoiop_20131009
2013-10-09 GMT-08:00 [PDT]
------ (012)
[7:55] PeterYim: . (013)
= OntoIOp team-confcall (n.44) - Wed 2013.10.09 = (014)
* Date: Wed 9-Oct-2013
* start-time: 8:00am PDT / 11:00 am EDT / 5:00pm CEST / 4:00pm BST /
12:00am[+1] KST / 1500 UTC
** ref. world clock -
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=10&day=9&year=2013&hour=8&min=30&sec=0&p1=224
* Duration: 1.0~1.5 Hrs. (015)
* in-session chat-workspace:
http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/ontoiop_20131009 (016)
* shared-file workspace for this session:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntoIOp/Team_confcall/2013-10-09_team-confcall_n.44/ (017)
Remarks: (018)
* the session may be recorded for archival purposes. Unless
otherwise documented, participants agrees to this by virtue
of their participation at the session. (019)
* In case we have to mute everyone (due to extraneous noise or echo)
- Mute control: *7 to un-mute ... *6 to mute (020)
* for Windows Skype users: Can't find Skype Dial pad?
... it may be under the "Call" dropdown menu as "Show Dial pad" (021)
* for Linux Skype users: please note that the dial-pad is only
available on v4.1 (or later or 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. (--CLange) (022)
AGENDA:
(a) brief report from the OMG New Jersey meeting [Gruninger] and discussion
(b) planning for the OMG proposal submission (023)
Attendees: TillMossakowski (chair), ChristophLange, MariaKeet,
MichaelGruninger, PeterYim (scribe), TerryLongstreth (024)
== Proceedings: == (025)
[8:02] PeterYim: == TillMossakowski starts the meeting ... (026)
[8:04] TillMossakowski: I have started to redesgin the OntoIOp
homepage at: http://ontoiop.org (027)
[8:04] TillMossakowski: have confirmed with Elisa that we can openly
publish the RFP (028)
[8:04] PeterYim: Till: agenda for today (a) brief report from the OMG
New Jersey meeting [Gruninger] and discussion; (b) planning for the
OMG proposal submission (029)
[8:05] PeterYim: === MichaelGruninger reports on the OMG New Jersey
meeting in September (030)
[8:06] PeterYim: @Maria @Till ... I muted both of you (as you are
introducing noise to the line) ... please un-mute with *7 before
speaking (031)
[8:06] TillMossakowski: for the record: here are Michael's notes: (032)
[8:06] TillMossakowski: == review of issues brought up at the New
Jersey meeting ... (033)
1. This is too ambitious -- this project is trying to solve all
interoperability problems.
- the scope of the metalanguage is too broad and ambitious
(Note: I think we need to emphasize heterogeneous interoperability among
ontologies; some people thought we were specifying mappings between
all possible languages and ontologies) (034)
2. This sounds like a research project, not a standards project.
Response: Provide formal definitions with citations to the literature
where these definitions have been stated.
e.g. what is the definition of a logically heterogeneous ontology? (035)
3. The role of translations and mappings
- will translations between specific languages (e.g. OWL-2 and CL)
be part of the standard?
- if so, will only one translation be allowed?
- what is the relationship between different translations between the
same two languages?
- will mappings between specific ontologies be part of the standard? (036)
4. What is the need for the metalanguage?
This justification needs to be aligned with the mandatory requirements.
Show how the requirements and related to the use cases. (037)
5. How detailed are the metalevel relationships?
For example, consider the Date-Time Vocabulary (dtv).
Do we simply say that dtv_owl is an approximation of dtv_cl
or does the standard specify in what way it is an approximation,
saying what is lost and what is preserved. (038)
6. Are the conformance criteria for logical languages specified
with enough detail to be testable? (039)
[8:12] PeterYim: Michael: lots of comment from Nicolas Rouquette -
"Rouquette, Nicolas F (316A)" <nicolas.f.rouquette@xxxxxxxxxxxx> (040)
[8:12] TillMossakowski: ad 1: we should emphasize that only a small
subset of languages and translations needs to be covered (comparable
in number to that of ODM). Moreover, the emphasis is on the meta
language, not on the concrete languages and translations.
Thanks to Elisa for mentioning fUML; this is a good point for keeping
the inclusion of UML manageable. (041)
We can also refer to DOL, which is a possible proposal answering the
RFP, with a number of logics and translations and even tool support
available. (042)
[8:14] TillMossakowski: the reference to DOL is problematic, because
DOL will be an answer to the RFP. So we should leave that out. (043)
[8:17] TillMossakowski: we should have two separate requirements: 1)
small core set of languages to be covered, 2) extensibility for any
logical language with a model theory (044)
[8:18] TerryLongstreth: You should be able to describe the history of
DOL (and it's predecessor projects) without specifics of the DOL
proposal (045)
[8:18] TillMossakowski: ad 2: we have enough references to cite (046)
[8:19] TillMossakowski: Heterogeneous Logical Theory should appear in
the glossary (047)
[8:20] TillMossakowski: Some useful reference is
Oliver Kutz, Till Mossakowski, Dominik Luecke (2010). Carnap, Goguen,
and the Hyperontologies - Logical Pluralism and Heterogeneous
Structuring in Ontology Design. In Logica Univeralis, 4 (2), pp.
255333.
http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~till/papers/Hyperontology.pdf (048)
[8:26] TillMossakowski: ad 3: (049)
[8:26] TillMossakowski: - specific languages and translations should
be part of an informative annex (050)
[8:27] TillMossakowski: - there should be more than one translation
allowed, with default translations (051)
[8:28] TillMossakowski: - the relationship between different
translations often is that there are different trade-offs, and they
have different properties (052)
[8:29] TillMossakowski: Michael: we need to be more precise about what
are different, and different but equivalent translations (053)
[8:29] TerryLongstreth: How can we establish conformance for an
extensibility requirement? (054)
[8:32] TillMossakowski: I would say: we require a mathematical
definition of a notion of logic (e.g. institutions), and the meta
language should work for all logics falling into this definition (055)
[8:33] TillMossakowski: ad 3: mappings between specific ontologies
will not be part of the standard (056)
[8:33] TillMossakowski: Maybe we even need more use cases for those
requirements that have not been "grounded" by a use case yet. (057)
[8:34] TillMossakowski: ad 4: Maybe we even need more use cases for
those requirements that have not been "grounded" by a use case yet. (058)
[8:34] TillMossakowski: we need to look at the table of features in
the old working draft (059)
[8:35] TillMossakowski: ad 5: Do we simply say that dtv_owl is an
approximation of dtv_cl ? Yes! (060)
[8:36] TerryLongstreth: "approximation" is equivalent to a lossy
transformation; i.e. unidirectional and non-reversible (061)
[8:40] TillMossakowski: there is research about approximating OWL in
EL, and Prop in HornProp, and also some initial work about
approximating FOL in OWL. (062)
[8:43] TillMossakowski: usually, in the research literature,
approximations are required to be maximal. If they are not, use an
interpretation of theories. (063)
[8:45] TillMossakowski: action: Michael asks Mark about DTV (064)
[8:46] TillMossakowski: ad 6: I just repeat: we require a mathematical
definition of a notion of logic (e.g. institutions), and the meta
language should work for all logics falling into this definition (065)
[8:52] PeterYim: Till: next meeting in 2 weeks, as usual - OntoIOp
confcall (n.45) Wed 2013.10.23 start-time: 8:00am PDT / 11:00 am EDT /
5:00pm CEST / 4:00pm BST / 12:00am[+1] KST / 1500 UTC (066)
[8:54] PeterYim: [action] Till will lead the edit of the RFP and put a
version on google-doc for collaborative contribution on editing
suggestions and proof-reading ... Till will later convert this back to
a word-doc for submission to OMG (067)
[8:55] PeterYim: -- session ended: 5:51pm CEST -- (068)
------ <OntoIOp-confcall-n44_chat-transcript_20131009b.txt> ------ (069)
_________________________________________________________________
To Post: mailto:ontoiop-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontoiop-forum/
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontoiop-forum/
Community Files (open): http://interop.cim3.net/file/pub/OntoIOp/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntoIOp (070)
|