Ken and All, (01)
The output of last year's Ontology Summit (ref.
when we tackled the theme "Making the Case for Ontology" would be a
good starting point. (02)
Take a look at the communique from 2011 -
Specifically, the table at:
which broke down the various classes of audience that ontologists
would need to make their case to, would be a good start. (04)
Thanks & regards. =ppy (05)
p.s. By the way, in view of our open-technology, open-content
advocacy, let's confine to open source tools (unless we agree to a
waiver at the organizing committee on a case-by-case basis.)
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Ken Allgood <ken.allgood@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Agree with the approach, and think it could substantially increase
> information exchange and overall audience engagement. As mentioned during
> the last planning session, I'm happy to help and have some IA tools I've
> used in the past to address such challenges. I believe Peter stated that
> there was a starting list of different consumer/contributor types and
> associated use context details which had already been assembled. If that's
> the case, we can begin with those, derive potential use cases/engagement
> models, and come up with usable personas and a classification approach
> fairly quickly.
> Peter, could you point us to that referenced list of candidate
> Ken (07)
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Ali SH <asaegyn+out@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> This email is an attempt to solicit help in making the output of this
>> year's Ontology Summit more accessible to those who did not participate in
>> the summit.
>> While the wiki and the communique are wonderful resources, they are not
>> aimed at a general audience. If we wish to increase the relevance of all the
>> activity that is currently underway, we could start by making the content
>> more welcoming and intuitively navigable.
>> The main motivation is that an ontologist or engineer coming to the
>> website is not necessarily interested in the entire content, but some
>> subselection of it. Moreover, to use a hackneyed phrase - it would be good
>> for us to eat our own dogfood.
>> Given the limited amount of time and resources at our disposal (and
>> problems I ran into last year), developing a comprehensive ontology for the
>> domain is not realistic.
>> The following might be a far simpler and achievable goal (though quite a
>> bit more brittle). By anticipating who might be interested in the output of
>> the summit, and to what end, we could provide just those bits of content
>> that are of interest to them, in a clear, aesthetically engaging way.
>> This would necessitate determining audience types, correlating to who
>> would want to view the summit and why. Examples might include:
>> Working systems engineer, wants to apply learnings from summit to their
>> Ontologist looking for design patterns to describe functions or systems
>> If we can identify a set of use cases that would cover the bulk of
>> anticipated interactions on the website, then we can work to make the
>> content more personalized and contextual. Namely, if we can ascertain that
>> the visitor is an engineer interested in systems of Type A (hopefully an
>> outcome of track two), then we might be able to present just those pieces of
>> content that are associated with Type A systems.
>> Aside from defining our audiences and anticipated website interactions, we
>> would also need to tag our content and write queries that would select the
>> appropriate content according to defined user needs and interests -- a sort
>> of proto-ontology or super lightweight ontology that simply connects
>> information about the user with content clusters. In this way, it should be
>> possible to structure and tag our content in such a way that we can deliver
>> a contextualized / personalized view which matches the intention of the
>> Any takers? (08)
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (09)