Thanks for the summary, I have not been able to follow this flurry of messages.
One thing left out is the big picture, what is the project about in general? I
can guess, but it might be a good idea to have a few sentences about that. This
would be especially useful for people coming into the discussion, or who want
to track it w/o being in it. (01)
Mike (02)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kurt Conrad
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:40 PM
To: Ontolog Forum
Subject: [ontolog-forum] UBL Project Status / Proposed Telecon (03)
All, (04)
Wow! 44 postings in 4 days. 15 different people have posted to the
discussion and another three or four have jointed the forum. (05)
I think that we have a viable project (assuming that all us cats can
be herded effectively). (06)
We are still officially in the planning phase, but a number of
conversations have already gotten traction (a semi-detailed analysis
follows). Not too surprising, the conversation has been heavily
focused on tools and technologies. (07)
My first reaction is to employ a conquer and divide strategy: (08)
* Start a thread / team to focus on goals and objectives. (09)
* Start a thread / team to focus on process and project management. (010)
* Let the conversations on tools and modeling issues continue at
their own pace, but try to add a bit more rigor. For each technology
option, provide:
* Name of the Technology
* Functional Description
* Features
* Strengths
* Weaknesses
* Source
* Licensing (011)
* Let the other topics shake out, as appropriate. (012)
A more traditional development model would start with requirements
definition, but I don't think that the other topics could be
effectively tabled, at this time. Also, what we choose to accomplish
is likely to be what can be achieved by leveraging established
technologies and process. Therefore, I expect that the inventory of
tools and techniques to be a critical input to the scoping and
requirements definition decisions that we need to make. (013)
Many of the potential requirements for this project are implicit in
the technical descriptions that have been provided. Accordingly, for
the next week or so, I suggest that we work both ends towards the middle. (014)
I also propose that we hold a kickoff teleconference relatively soon,
preferably Wednesday, March 12th. At this time, two time-slots are
available: 10:30-12:00 PST (1:30-3:00 EST) or 1:00-2:30 PST
(4:00-5:30 EST). (015)
How many of you could attend a telecon next Wednesday? Which time
would be prefable? (016)
/s/ kwc 2003.03.06 23:33 (017)
QUICK ANALYSIS OF DISCUSSION TO DATE: (018)
Goals (019)
* Identify appropriate metrics to measure and capture those measures
during this project (as a starting point to developing guidance).
[Norma Slattery] (020)
* Open Source [Farrukh Najmi, Mike Daconta, Duane Nickull] (021)
* Concurrent ontology development tools [Leo Obrst] (022)
* Parallel development of a real-life public-domain APPLICATION that
uses the ontology in a non-trivial way to illustrate the reasoning
capacity that the ontology is intended to provide (select one which
is freely available or build one) [Patrick Cassidy] (023)
* Learn about and refine our ontology building skills [Mike Daconta] (024)
* Craft an ontology suitable for adoption by the UBL committee, which
presumes that acceptance equates to accurate modeling of the domain
[Mike Daconta] (025)
* Apply medical ontologies using ebXML Registry [Farrukh Najmi] (026)
* Role: Volunteer to develop use cases [Mike Daconta] (027)
Process and Project Management (028)
* Collaborative work environment options [Peter Yim] (029)
* Need: Someone who has working proficiency with Protégé and is
willing to provide some working guidance/leadership [Peter Yim]
** Response: I have a working proficiency and am willing to provide
Protégé guidance as best as I can. Start by reviewing
http://protege.stanford.edu/publications/ontology_development/ontology101.html
[Mike Daconta] (030)
* Planning/tasking session at the beginning to develop some goals for
the collaboration, etc. [Leo Obrst] (031)
* Agreement on a firm set of rules as to how controversies are to be
decided, and a set of deadlines as to when particular phases of the
effort should be completed [Patrick Cassidy] (032)
* Role: UBL consultant to the project [Tim McGrath] (033)
* Develop some concrete goals for the utility of the ontology beyond
the development of an accurate model [Mike Daconta] (034)
* Consider following the simple ontology development simple process
outlined in the ontology101.html document [Mike Daconta] (035)
* Define some use-cases for the ontology [Mike Daconta] (036)
* Translation/refinement of UBL models [Mike Daconta, Dean Black,
Patrick Cassidy, Leo Obrst] (037)
* Guarino and Welty's OntoClean methodology (now merged with
Methontology) [Leo Obrst] (038)
* NexistWiki [Jack Park] (039)
Opportunities & Threats (040)
* An independent UBL ontology effort could either help normalize
other UBL-related efforts (OAG, UCC/EAN, PIDX, RosettaNet, etc.) or
could be seen as repetitive [John Yunker] (041)
* Drive the requirements and features of ebXML Registry V4 [Farrukh Najmi] (042)
Technology Options (043)
* Use an ebXML Registry as an Ontology/Terminology Server (extend /
include V4 ontology support) [Farrukh Najmi, Mike Daconta, Duane
Nickull, Leo Obrst, John Yunker] (044)
* Protégé [Peter Yim, Leo Obrst] (045)
* Agreed-upon representation language [Leo Obrst] (046)
* Use MS Enterprise Architect and UML-ORM tools to extend the core
documents and related schema [Bob Smith] (047)
* Protégé with OntoViz plugin, using RDF/S as the representation
language [Mike Daconta] (048)
* Content management system [Farrukh Najmi] (049)
* OWL [Farrukh Najmi] (050)
* Open-ended ontology inference engine [Farrukh Najmi] (051)
* Various representation languages (UML, XML [DTDs and Schemas]),
OKBC knowledge model, KIF, Common Logic) [Leo Obrst] (052)
* Prolog engine (XSB, Amzi!, binProlog) [Leo Obrst] (053)
* OntologyWorks tool [Leo Obrst]
* FLORA language plug in for Protégé [Leo Obrst] (054)
* Java + Prolog [Leo Obrst] (055)
* JESS (Java Expert System Shell based on CLIPS) [Leo Obrst] (056)
* IODE from OntologyWorks [Michael Uschold] (057)
* Ontolingua (translation from KIF to Prolog) [Leo Obrst] (058)
* ISO-IEC-11179 classification standard [Leo Obrst] (059)
Application Models (060)
* Deductive database (logic programming + relational database, so
that you get inference and set at a time operations from a RDB) [Leo
Obrst] (061)
Issues (062)
* Formalization model(s) [Mike Daconta] (063)
* Common definition of Ontology (e.g., vs Taxonomy) (064)
___________________________________________________________________
Kurt Conrad
2994 Salem Dr. 408-247-0454
Santa Clara, CA 95051-5502 408-247-0457 (data/fax)
http://www.SagebrushGroup.com mailto:conrad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (065)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (066)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To Post:
mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (067)
|