Great, Ali! ... Forwarding this thread to the Ontolog community now ... (01)
ALL: Let's continue the conversation here (on the [ontolog-forum] list). (02)
Thanks & regards. =ppy
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ali SH <asaegyn+out@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, May 25, 2011 at 5:26 AM
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Making the Summit Accessible
To: Ontology Summit 2011 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (04)
Yes, it seems like a good idea to shift the conversation over to the
Unfortunately, I will be without electronic communication until June
6, so I won't be able to contribute until then.
I will catch up then.
(•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,., (07)
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dear Ali and All,
> Thank you, Ali ... this is great! ... I concur and encourage everyone
> interested to actively engage in this conversation.
> 1. I agree with you, and am in favor of having *one website* as the
> home to all summit "presentations" year-after-year. (I believe that
> academic conferences have their annual conferences distributed in
> different site-locations are a result of how "ownerships" get passed
> from institution to institution, and not a function of optimal
> 2. note that the Ontolog-CWE (collaborative work environment)
> actually have four key components in the infrastructure (a
> portal/website space, a wiki, an archived mailing list and a webdav
> server ... representing four somewhat orthogonal workspaces - a
> presentation space, a collaborative authoring and synchronization
> workspace, a conversation space, and a shared-file repository.) With
> your effort here, looks like we can finally take advantage of the
> portal/website infrastructure that has been sitting around all these
> 3. since OntologySummit2011 is officially over, and this exercise
> that you are leading is actually using OntologySummit2011 as a case to
> develop something that extends beyond this year's Summit and is
> important to the entire ontology community, you might consider moving
> the conversation to the [ontolog-forum] list, where the reach is wider
> (roughly twice the number of subscribers, and more international
> 4. to augment this threaded discussion, please consider picking one
> (or even several) time slots to run real-time focused discussion
> and/or workshop(s) on this effort, making use of, say, the regular
> Ontolog Thursday event time slot and virtual panel discussion session
> format, as you feel appropriate. Reserve any date that is marked
> "open" on our Ontolog master event calendar - see:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?MeetingsCalls (email me if I
> can be of help to facilitate the organization of such event(s).)
> Thanks & regards. =ppy
> -- (08)
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Ali Hashemi <ali@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > beyond the conclusion of the face-to-face meetings.
> > As a follow up to yesterday's conference call
> > (http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2011_05_19), I think
> > we agreed on the need for developing something more than a Communique. We
> > need to present the culmination of the summit (Communique + Tracks + Wiki
> > content) in a more effective manner.
> > Specifically, if we're considering putting the creation of a website as an
> > additional explicit goal of the outcome of future summits, then I think we
> > have one of two choices:
> > One central site that contains each year
> > One site for each year (i.e. how academic conferences usually collect
> > material)
> > I think the first one makes more sense, as it provides a more unified view
> > of the progress of ontology and the summits. My personal experience with
> > conference websites (say for IJCAI) is that each year differs highly in
> > quality, they are not presented in a consistent way, and are generally a
> > frustrating way to keep track of conferences over a long period of time.
> > Beyond the above consideration, I would suggest that the purpose of each
> > site should be to support the theme of the summit and mediate the relation
> > to resources developed over the course of the summit in a more accessible
> > manner.
> > I'll use the 2011 Making the Case Summit to illustrate what I mean by the
> > above statement.
> > In this case, we identified a number of tracks tackling different aspects of
> > one problem -- how to construct a compelling, persuasive argument re
> > ontologies. In the course of this process, we collected, developed and are
> > ultimately providing the material for ontology evangelists to make actual
> > cases. Not only that, but the resources we provide include identifying a set
> > of target audiences and broad strategies that evangelists might actually
> > employ.
> > !!
> > The fact that an ontology evangelist would use the output of the summit to
> > make a case should drive our organization and access to the collected and
> > developed material. That is how a site would support the theme of this
> > year's summit.
> > To briefly recap,
> > We identified a number of different audiences
> > who care about a number of different metrics
> > We identified a set of benefits that ontology can provide
> > with corersponding metrics
> > We solicited and collected a number of use cases
> > where presumably, ontology actually delivered those benefits
> > and it is expressible via the metrics.
> > Remembering why an evangelist would be accessing the communique in the first
> > place, this suggests a natural layout... Just to be explicit, an ontology
> > evangelist wants to persuade at least the audiences we identified (+perhaps
> > others that we missed) using at least the resources we provided. So given
> > their audience, they’re interested in only a subset of the benefits, metrics
> > and use cases at any one time. Moreover it would be useful for them to see
> > which use cases and value metrics apply to which audience member.
> > So... We should capture these relations in our content, and provide views
> > into the summit web site according to the evangelist's target audience.
> > (Evangelist (wants_to) convince TargetAudience)
> > (TargetAudiences value Benefits)
> > (TargetAudiences respond_to Metrics)
> > (Metrics measure Benefits)
> > (UseCases deliver Benefits)
> > The ValueMetrics Synthesis (
> > ) already largely captures the mapping between the UseCases and both
> > Benefits and Metrics.
> > As Michael Uschold noted in today’s meeting, we should be able to develop an
> > ontology for the usage framework. I believe it is also possible to connect
> > that with the value metrics, and finally connect that to the target audience
> > to create a tight loop to drive the development of our web effort.
> > What we need to do is make these relations a bit more formal (and perhaps
> > machine readable)! And also, clearly articulate which Benefits and which
> > ValueMetrics correspond to which TargetAudience. Machine readable
> > representations are particularly desirably if we want to grow the usage
> > example collection and provide dynamic views of our resources to the users.
> > With such a structure in place, we can then develop a site that better
> > corresponds to evangelist needs. Though of course, it would also be useful
> > to have a presentation scheme that presents the story of the evolution of
> > the summit as well.
> > Are there any volunteers? Might someone in the ValueSynthesis track be able
> > to extract the relevant bits of the matrix in some formalism? Can we agree
> > on a vocabulary for audience, benefits, metrics and use case types in a
> > machine readable way? <-- This is already informally done in the
> > communique+tracks to some degree. The results of this analysis will at the
> > very least drive the layout of the pages+views, and perhaps facilitate the
> > technology implementation for the delivery of "nuggets" of content that
> > we'll be hosting. We can discuss what a "nugget" of content means for this
> > summit...
> > Best,
> > Ali
> > --
> > (•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,.,
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> > Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
> > Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2011/
> > Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011
> > Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (09)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
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 (010)