[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] summit_20141009: Chat Transcript

To: Ontology Summit 2010 Organizing Committee <ontology-summit-org@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Michael Gruninger <gruninger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 17:01:23 -0400
Message-id: <5436F7A3.9010607@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Chat transcript from room: summit_20141009
2014-10-09 GMT-08:00
[09:27] MichaelGruninger: Welcome everyone to the Ontology Summit 2015 Community Brainstorming Session!
[09:31] anonymous morphed into SteveRay
[09:32] anonymous morphed into ChristopherSpottiswoode
[09:33] anonymous1 morphed into Ram D. Sriram
[09:35] anonymous morphed into A;iHashemi
[09:35] A;iHashemi morphed into AliHashemi
[09:36] MichaelGruninger: 1. Overview & introduction 2. Open discussion: explore the theme(s) and topics that the community would want to see covered in OntologySummit2015 3. Any other business 4. Recap Actions, Summary & Wrap-up
[09:38] anonymous morphed into MichaelRiben
[09:41] MatthewWest: Apologies for late arrival. Minor domestic emergency.
[09:42] ChristophLange: Excuse me, a question about the new wiki. Seems the accounts of the old wiki don't work here. But, at http://ontolog-02.cim3.net/w/index.php?title=Special:UserLogin&returnto=WikiHomePage, how do I create a new account?
[09:46] MikeBennett: Topics 1, 2 and 4 are potentially almost the same thing: what lessons have been developed in previous summits, how does one define the discipline of ontological engineering around this and how to write a book that presents this.
[09:46] anonymous morphed into FrankOlken
[09:48] TerryLongstreth: Reasoning with ontologies could be broken into Machine and Human reasoning; the first would probably be software engineering oriented, the second would explore the application of ontologies as a tool of thought.
[09:48] anonymous morphed into JoelBender
[09:49] TerryLongstreth: The initial outline for the textbook could be derived from Slide 4
[09:50] SteveRay: @Terry: I like your idea of training materials.
[09:50] FrankOlken: I have joined the teleconference. ---Frank Olken
[09:51] MatthewWest: I would be keen that we worked towards a deliverable (other than a communique).
[09:52] anonymous morphed into Mark Underwood
[09:52] ToddSchneider: Perhaps, if we go with the text book notion, then the summit could produce the outline with some degree of content/detail. And in place of the usual communique, a set of training material. In addition, as a Hack-a-thon theme, mining the Ontolog forum and past summit materials.
[09:52] anonymous morphed into Mark Underwood1
[09:52] SteveRay: @Todd: I meant to say Todd, not Terry!
[09:52] MichaelGruninger: Combining topics might lead to something like Applied Ontology / Ontological Engineering Body of Knowledge
[09:53] LeoObrst: Yes, the textbook idea can encompass the other topics, since many of the previous summit themes would probably be separate chapters in the book.
[09:53] TerryLongstreth: @Steve: Thanks. I also like Leo's idea of using the titles of previous summits as topics.
[09:54] ToddSchneider: How would a body of knowledge be presented?
[09:54] JoelBender: I like the idea of a textbook, and I would like to help packaging into a variety of consumable forms (eDoc, HTML, PDF, LaTeX, etc)
[09:55] MikeBennett: Question is how we structure the Summit activities to pull this BoK together?
[09:55] MatthewWest: There is a large amount of information from the ontolog presentations, as well as the summit and even the ontolog forum email list. But it is not organized in a way that is useful. Mining it and presenting it in a coherent way and identifying gaps would be useful.
[09:56] JoelBender: I would also like some kind Q&A and the ends of the chapters to review
[09:56] MikeBennett: Ken's point is a good one - part of structuring this is identifying the skills. I'd add we're looking both at the pre-requisite skills and the skills to be developed through training.
[09:56] ToddSchneider: Ken, training materials usually have examples and student problems.
[09:56] MikeDean: see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_of_Knowledge for quite a few examples of BOKs
[09:57] ToddSchneider: Ken, could training materials be extended to a 'complete' text book?
[09:57] SteveRay: I strongly agree with what MikeBennett is saying. I'm always amazed at the longevity and continued use of Natasha Noy's old old paper on how to create an ontology.
[09:58] ToddSchneider: It's not incompatible to have multiple outcomes/deliverables from the summit.
[09:59] MikeBennett: Examples ... and counter-examples?
[09:59] MatthewWest: Should we use a traditional wiki approach? Should part of what we produce be some articles on wikipedia?
[09:59] JoelBender: Could the training materials be in a Self Paced Instruction format, and/or a MOOC?
[09:59] Mark Underwood1: Agree that Wikipedia contribs is useful, though requires dedicated attention if the current "owners" are vigilant about the subj
[10:00] MikeBennett: Apologies, i need to drop off the audio now.
[10:00] ToddSchneider: Joel, I would think the former. But a BoK might take the place of MOOC.
[10:00] SteveRay: I have to go also. I'll review the chat later.
[10:00] LeoObrst: @KenBaclawski: we could even consider a focused example that embodies the excercises and which spans all the chapters, with different aspects of course.
[10:01] KenBaclawski: It would be very helpful to have realistic examples in full detail using best practices. Too much of what I see is much too high-level for a course. These would be very useful even if they are not just a disparate collection of examples.
[10:01] MichaelGruninger: RamSriram: What is the role / purpose of the Summit?
[10:02] MichaelGruninger: RamSriram: Applied Ontology and the Internet of Things
[10:03] JoelBender: +1
[10:03] Mark Underwood1: IoT is plenty big, maybe too big
[10:03] KenBaclawski: @[12:56] ToddSchneider: They often do have examples, but they are not necessarily very realistic. Just look at any Database textbook. The examples are mostly not very good.
[10:04] JoelBender: But the typical presentations of IoT focus on smaller realms like Home Automation, which should be focused enough for a chapter.
[10:04] Mark Underwood1: I just wrote a short blog post on smart buildings and the ontology needs there are legion
[10:05] Ram D. Sriram1: That is an effort going on at NIST
[10:05] TerryLongstreth: @Ram: perhaps the summit could expand / generalize your idea to base the Summit on "Ontology aspects of Current Social and Technology trends "
[10:05] AliHashemi: Re the textbook idea - using part of the summit to identify how to utilize the web+browsers to deliver content could be something of interest, c.f. http://www.nature.com/nature_education/interactive_textbooks
[10:05] MichaelGruninger: ChristopherSpottiswoode: Possible topic related to the activities of the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace
[10:06] Mark Underwood1: http://www.nist.gov/nstic/
[10:06] Ram D. Sriram1: @Terry: We call that Smart Networked Systems and Societies, i.e., a connected network of Internet of Things and Social Networks
[10:06] KenBaclawski: The idea of developing realistic examples could be combined with the retrospective idea. Lots of great examples were developed in the previous summits, but they need to be collected and documented.
[10:07] LeoObrst: @ChristopherSpottiswoode: can you provide some references to this?
[10:07] TerryLongstreth: Trends so far: nstic, internet of things, disaster responses - http://www.gdacs.org/...
[10:08] LeoObrst: Thanks, all.
[10:09] KenBaclawski: @[13:00] LeoObrst: Yes, running examples are valuable.
[10:10] Ram D. Sriram1: Here is a link to an animated video of NSTIC: http://www.nist.gov/nstic/animation.html
[10:10] Mark Underwood1: https://www.idecosystem.org/
[10:11] KenBaclawski: @[12:57] ToddSchneider: Yes, good examples and training materials are an excellent basis for a textbook.
[10:11] AliHashemi: @KenBaclawski - in an online textbook, one could use ontology best practices in building the resource itself.
[10:11] Ram D. Sriram1: Regarding NSTIC, I think you might want a more general topic about the role of ontologies in privacy and cybersecurity. Not clear whether we can get enough people to take about this.
[10:12] TerryLongstreth: @Ram - I didn't mean Social networks (not only, anyway), but changes in societies and cultures and how can ontologies help with evolution/devolution.
[10:12] Mark Underwood1: RE the Sec & Privacy - I'm on the NIST Big Data WG S&P subgroup ... longer conversation on that available
[10:13] Mark Underwood1: http://bigdatawg.nist.gov/home.php
[10:13] KenBaclawski: @[13:11] AliHashemi: Indeed, one should always "eat one's own dogfood".
[10:15] KenBaclawski: Correction: In [13:01] KenBaclawski I meant "even if they are just a disparate collection"
[10:15] MikeDean: pressed the wrong button on my phone - back in a minute
[10:20] Mark Underwood1: In the Big Data WG's, this is the "Variety" dimension, especially when PII + IoT combine to weaken anonymizaiton
[10:22] MikeDean: Internet of Things is topical - I'd keep that term in the title
[10:23] LeoObrst: I think that the "Reasoning with Ontologies" topic can also be an aspect of the textbook, and in addition bring in folks from the mini-series last year on this topic, which we may still explore in additional sessions this year.
[10:23] Ram D. Sriram1: I think reasoning could be a part on any of the topics discussed. Will we get enough people to talk about this
[10:24] AliHashemi: I would agree with the speaker that it's too early in the technology cycle for IoT
[10:24] Mark Underwood1: @MikeDean - Agree IoT will attract more architect interest
[10:24] LeoObrst: How about the Internet of Abstract Things? ;)
[10:25] MichaelGruninger: Potential topic arising from the discussion: Sociotechnical Aspects of Applied Ontology
[10:25] KenBaclawski: @[13:23] LeoObrst: I agree. Any realistic example will involve reasoning issues, and one part of the solution will involve selecting an appropriate reasoning approach/technology.
[10:25] ToddSchneider: Leo,
[10:26] ToddSchneider: Leo, What's abstract? Or abstract with respect to what?
[10:26] ChristopherSpottiswoode: @LeoObrst: nstic.gov for that context. For my take on it, please be patient for my post to the Summit list.
[10:28] MikeDean: I think it's actually the perfect time for IoT
[10:29] ToddSchneider: Have to go to another meeting. Cheers.
[10:29] LeoObrst: Also, a possible other topic/theme: information (or even physical) artifacts and specifications. These notions come up all the time, and there is a rich literature on artifacts in ontological analysis. This topic could also get into design issues.
[10:30] Mark Underwood1: A possible new "track," is also in the software engineering direction, is ontology support for software test, reliability engineering, recovery, resilience and forensics. (List uncomfortably, intentionally broad). Testing completeness could be enhanced by systematic exploitation of domain ontology models, vs. seat-of-pants testing frameworks
[10:30] LeoObrst: I agree with MikeDean that if we could get out front on the IoT topic emphasizing ontologies, that could be very good.
[10:30] KenBaclawski: The various topics such as IoT and PII could be the basis for examples of how ontologies could be applied in real-world problems. This would serve both as a way of being more focused by having relatively specific tracks while also contributing to the "textbook" idea.
[10:32] Ram D. Sriram1: If anyone is interested, I can send my slide set on Smart Networked Systems and Societies
[10:32] Mark Underwood1: @Ram - sure - mark.underwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[10:34] Mark Underwood1: Is the goal to go wide, or go narrow for the summit?
[10:35] JoelBender: @Ram: yes please, jjb5@xxxxxxxxxxx
[10:36] LeoObrst: Yes, Ram, would like to see this.
[10:38] Mark Underwood1: Provenance (or Veracity) for the Big Data V
[10:40] LeoObrst: @TerryLongstreth: yes, and with 3D printing, we will be creating more "things", and the information/physical distinction begins to break down.
[10:40] MichaelGruninger: There seem to be four possible topics that have emerged from the discussion so far: 1) Applied Ontology Body of Knowledge; 2) Internet of Things; 3) Sociotechnical Aspects of Applied Ontology; 4) Artefacts
[10:41] TerryLongstreth: @Leo- extend artifacts discussion to include those which have no intrinsic physical manifestation (i.e. digital objects)
[10:41] LeoObrst: Also, one can consider the IoT really does expand the network stack upward, perhaps at the top being the ontological level?
[10:42] Mark Underwood1: @Leo Hard to the avoid the SDN topic then
[10:43] MichaelGruninger: Decision: Identify one or two champions for each of the above potential topics. We will have a follow-up meeting sometime in November to select the topic
[10:44] MichaelGruninger: so that the Org Committee has time to prepare for the Pre-launch in december
[10:44] MichaelGruninger: 1) Applied Ontology Body of Knowledge. Champions: MatthewWest and KenBaclwaski
[10:45] MichaelGruninger: 2) Internet of Things. Champions: MarkUnderwood and RamSriram and JoelBender
[10:47] MichaelGruninger: 3) Sociotechnical Aspects of Applied Ontology. Champions: TerryLongstreth, ChristopherSpottiswoode
[10:48] JoelBender: On campus I have slightly less than a million things (building automation sensors, values, etc) with some naming convention and no ontology - so I'm kind of desperate to make an IoT ontology happen
[10:48] MichaelGruninger: 4) Artefacts. Champions: LeoObrst
[10:50] LeoObrst: I'm also interested in topic (1)and (2).
[10:51] MikeBennett: Pre-launch event should probably be Dec 4th since there is an OMG meeting on 11th which some might be attending.
[10:53] MichaelGruninger: Next meeting on November 6, 2014. Objective of this meeting will be the final selection of the Ontology Summit 2015 theme
[10:53] MichaelGruninger: We will also identify the Organizing Committee at that time

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    (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [ontolog-forum] summit_20141009: Chat Transcript, Michael Gruninger <=