Ravi & All: (01)
You had asked for some thoughts on Linked Open Data. First, thanks for
asking. Second, if Peter Patel-Schneider's story of the Semantic Web is
a Cautionary Tale, (02)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-661464686397234947# (03)
then LOD may well be the Fairy Story. Joking aside, if you have a meme,
it will spread. Apparently this one is. There's a lot more to be said,
but here's a message I recently sent to another forum. (04)
-- (05)
David & All: (06)
It seems there's a conversation trying to start itself on what LOD
actually is. Ouch ... (07)
While taking the risk of suggesting something more than that on which
we've already gained agreement (an lod design principle), I wanted to
share a few observations relevant to future directions for LOD. (08)
1. I had about 60 days to examine LOD full time in 2009 early in the
development of recovery.gov at which time I differentiated the roles
publisher and linker. Differentiating these roles proved useful in
better analyzing LOD outcomes. For example, assuming decentralize
publishing by ARRA recipients at least a "minimal intervention" would be
required to effect a predetermined outcome by linkers. How else would,
let's say 50 states, make sufficiently consistent choices separately
that would be later linked? I think this needs to be further examined. (09)
As an aside, there may be a video available soon from the recent datagov
mashathon where I demonstrate the Data Typing by Usage pattern from
Working Ontologist to "link" a recipient ontology and an xbrl ontology
of an SEC filer through subproperty subsumption. The inference that a
certain SEC Filer is an ARRA Recipient was the salient point. (010)
2. My second observation from the recovery.gov work is the need to
develop an approach to "edge specifications." An edge specification is
an assembly from preexisting vocabularies and possibly new elements into
a whole. The idea is to identify a specification development approach
for LOD that's different from a "core specification" where already known
terms are redefined. At the edge they are reused. (011)
There's a brief mention in footnote 10 here ... (012)
http://www.talis.com/nodalities/pdf/nodalities_issue9.pdf (013)
FWIW - For those who haven't seen it, here's the original use case from
for Open Government: Linked Open Data, published just a few days after
the US election on December 2, 2008 . (014)
http://www.w3.org/egov/wiki/Use_Case_8_-_Linked_Open_Government (015)
BTW - has anyone tried to "link" DbPedia to, let's say, Metaweb on
Chemical element? (016)
--
Rick (017)
On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 10:09 -0400, ravi sharma wrote:
> Rick
>
> As you might recall I was tuned in to that wonderful effort closely
> and yes George is contributing to Health Services Architectures.
>
> Can you kindly give us a view of how you see that effort tied to
> * Linked Open Data
> * Semantic Web
> * Ontology - integration,
> at least in Government / Federal EA space.
>
> Also on the thread dealing with DODAF - DM2 and Ontic Foundation of
> DODAF 2.0 still are not semantically or through ontology integrated;
> and their roadmap is not clear?
>
> Thanks.
> Ravi
>
> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Rick Murphy <rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> Ian:
>
> Readers of the TQ paper will notice references to GSA, the
> sponsoring agency. Between 2004 and 2009 our team had the
> opportunity to examine the relevance of semantics to
> enterprise architecture at a reasonable level of financial and
> management support. With a change in leadership that support
> was lost.
>
> Thankfully, we placed some of our work in an open source
> repository so others could take advantage of the tax dollars
> that funded this effort.
>
> http://osera.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/osera/
>
> Unfortunately, what's available in the repository represents
> only part of our team's work. Our most promising work extended
> well beyond model driven architecture and the semantic web,
> though we did a LOT of that. The Information Flow Framework,
> Category Theory and Goguen and Burstall's Institutions became
> part of the core team's understanding.
>
> As I reflect on those five amazing years and what has followed
> since, I am resolved to follow the truth instead of a trend
> and thankful that the government has a leader in George
> Thomas.
>
> --
> Rick
>
>
>
> On 8/22/2010 4:18 AM, Ian Bailey wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > The defence departments of Australia, Canada, Sweden, UK and
> > US have been working on a formal ontology to support their
> > enterprise architecture efforts – www.ideasgroup.org
> >
> >
> >
> > All we’ve released so far is the foundation -
> > http://www.ideasgroup.org/foundation/ - but quite a bit more
> > has been done on building patterns for processes, agents,
> > information, systems, capabilities, etc. The foundation has
> > been used to underpin the DoDAF 2.0 meta-model (DM2) –
> > though the resulting meta-model isn’t what most people would
> > recognise as an ontology. The Swedish Armed Forces are
> > investigating how the MODAF Meta-Model (currently a UML
> > Profile) could be re-engineered into a formal ontology based
> > on IDEAS.
> >
> >
> >
> > John Zachman was over in the UK in March for the
> > Integrated-EA conference and had some discussions with UK
> > MOD on ontology and enterprise architecture. From the brief
> > conversations I had with him, he seemed very enthusiastic
> > about ontology in general.
> >
> >
> >
> > At the same conference, Jonathan Carter and Jason Powell
> > presented on an open-source approach to EA development using
> > Protege – see http://www.integrated-ea.com/Previous-Years
> >
> >
> >
> > Back in 2007, I presented on ontology and EA at the Open
> > Group and EA Europe conferences – slides are here:
> > http://www.modelfutures.com/Publications/
> >
> >
> >
> > That, and the paper from Top Quadrant (which has already
> > been mentioned in this thread) are the only efforts I’m
> > aware of for “semantic EA”.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hope this helps
> >
> > --
> >
> > Ian Bailey
> >
> > Model Futures
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> > Config Subscr:
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> > Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki:
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join:
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> > To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks.
> Ravi
> (Dr. Ravi Sharma)
> 313 204 1740 Mobile
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (018)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (019)
|