Duane, (01)
I assume you problem with (A) was that notion of a "federated"
repository is left out in the definition. (02)
In fact. "federated" has already been incorporated into the OOR
Mission Statement
(see: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository#nid17YN
) from the group's 2001.01.03 meeting discussions (ref.
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2008_01_03 ). (03)
If I remember correctly, "federated" was left out, by choice (during
the Jan-23 meeting discussion), from the definition (A) which leaves a
repository to be either centralized, distributed, federated, etc. (04)
We have got to remember that we are defining "ontology repository" her
and not declaring the OOR mission -- which we have already done with
the OOR Mission Statement/Charter. (05)
Thanks & regards. =ppy
-- (06)
On Feb 6, 2008 9:30 AM, Duane Nickull <dnickull@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Understood. One of the reasons why I don't like A is that it implies a
> constraint whereby all things have to be in one single location, rather than
> the industry view which is that things may persist in multiple locations and
> the registry is the mechanism which provides the centralized view.
> Newcomers to registry-repository sometimes think in terms of a single place
> to store things. In reality, this would be architecturally inelegant and it
> does not scale well and presents a potential single point of failure for any
> infrastructure relying on that mechanism.
>
> A registry should be separate from a repository so that it may point at
> multiple repository items IMO, rather than requiring all of them to be
> centrally stored.
>
> Duane
>
>
>
> On 2/6/08 9:20 AM, "Sharma, Ravi" <Ravi.Sharma@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >
> > Duane
> >
> > I jut wanted to clarify to all that we have to imply a mechanism for
> > input, "persist" is a stage after you "input" or "ingest" data or
> > information in a data-store or repository. The word "Storage" implies
> > "input" and "persist" and is only included in option A.
> >
> > I wish "storage" could still be added to option B.
> >
> > The word for output, namely "Retrieve" is there in both options.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Ravi
> >
> > (Dr. Ravi Sharma) Senior Enterprise Architect
> >
> > Vangent, Inc. Technology Excellence Center (TEC)
> >
> > 8618 Westwood Center Drive, Suite 310, Vienna VA 22182
> > (o) 703-827-0638, (c) 313-204-1740 www.vangent.com
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Duane Nickull
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 2:23 AM
> > To: OpenOntologyRepository-discussion
> > Subject: Re: [oor-forum] Defining "Ontology Repository" (maybe
> > "OntologyRegistry" too) for the OOR Initiative
> >
> > Yes. Persist"
> >
> > To be maintained across session boundaries, usually in nonvolatile
> > storage
> > such as a database system or a directory.
> > publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/adiehelp/topic/com.ibm.wsinted.glossar
> > y.do
> > c/topics/glossary.html
> >
> > http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=define%3A+persist&bt
> > nG=G
> > oogle+Search
> >
> > For those of us who still write code and work on enterprise architecture
> > it
> > is a very simple, unambiguous notion.
> >
> > Duane
> >
> >
> > On 2/5/08 5:27 PM, "Sharma, Ravi" <Ravi.Sharma@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> Peter
> >> I would like comment on B -which perhaps does not make sense without
> > the
> >> word and implied mechanism of input or "storage". Does the verb
> >> "persist" imply storage?
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> Ravi
> >>
> >> (Dr. Ravi Sharma) Senior Enterprise Architect
> >>
> >> Vangent, Inc. Technology Excellence Center (TEC)
> >>
> >> 8618 Westwood Center Drive, Suite 310, Vienna VA 22182
> >> (o) 703-827-0638, (c) 313-204-1740 www.vangent.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ken Baclawski
> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 5:44 PM
> >> To: OpenOntologyRepository-discussion
> >> Subject: Re: [oor-forum] Defining "Ontology Repository" (maybe
> >> "OntologyRegistry" too) for the OOR Initiative
> >>
> >> (A)
> >>
> >> -- Ken
> >>
> >> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Peter Yim wrote:
> >>
> >>> We now have two candidate definitions to adopt:
> >>>
> >>> * Candidate-(A): the definition of "ontology repository" for the OOR
> >> initiative
> >>>
> >>> "An ontology repository is a facility where ontologies and related
> >>> information artifacts can be stored, retrieved and managed."
> >>>
> >>> * Candidate-(B): the definition of "ontology repository" and
> > "ontology
> >>> registry" for the OOR initiative
> >>>
> >>> "An ontology repository is a facility or facilities where ontology
> >>> related artifacts may be persisted and retrieved."
> >>> and,
> >>> "An ontology registry is where metadata can be declared governing
> >>> the storage, semantics, ownership and access policies for artifacts
> >>> persisted in the ontology repository."
> >>>
> >>> ALL: please cast your vote by replying to this thread and indicate
> >>> (A), (B) or "abstain." Voting closes at 8:30am PST / 11:30am EST /
> >>> 16:30 UTC on Thu 2008.02.07
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks & regards. =ppy
> >>>
> >>> P.S. Rex and Ken, please cast your vote again, sorry. =ppy
> >>> --
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 5, 2008 5:35 AM, <dbedford@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Peter,
> >>>>
> >>>> Correct.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>> Denise
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 5, 2008 4:05 AM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>> Thank you, Denise. I assume that is for Duane's motion he made in:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Duane Nickull wrote Feb 4, 2008 10:32 AM PST,
> >>>> //
> >>>>
> >>>> Motion made to adopt these definitions instead:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1. An Ontology repository is a facility or facilities where ontology
> >> related
> >>>> artifacts may be persisted and retrieved.
> >>>>
> >>>> 2. An Ontology Registry is where metadata can be declared governing
> >> the
> >>>> storage, semantics, ownership and access policies for artifacts
> >> persisted in
> >>>> the ontology repository.
> >>>>
> >>>> //
> >>>>
> >>>> (please let us know otherwise.)
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks & regards. =ppy
> >>>>
> >>>> P.S. since I have other commitments today, I will not be able to
> >> make a
> >>>> post (about the next step in the process) right after the previously
> >>>> discussed cut-off time for submitting new candidate definitions, but
> >> will
> >>>> only be able to post about that later in the day. That cut-off time
> >> is still
> >>>> in effect, though (since no one objected yesterday.) Please note.
> >> Tx. =ppy
> >>>> --
> >>>
> >>>> On Feb 5, 2008 3:41 AM, <dbedford@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> All,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I second Duane's motion so we can move forward to vote.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Denise
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 4, 2008 2:53 PM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>> All,
> >>>>
> >>>> As mentioned previously, I was hoping we could summarily adopt the
> >>>> motion that has been outstanding so we could move ahead with the
> >>>> initiative and do something concrete.
> >>>>
> >>>> I am equally as happy that there are some last minute input, but
> > hope
> >>>> we can wrap this up soon enough, to be fair to those who had
> >> actually
> >>>> spend time at the meeting to discuss the subject matter, and voiced
> >>>> their opinion within the time set aside for discussion.
> >>>>
> >>>> Unless there are objections, let us try to close this (the
> > discussion
> >>>> and possible new motions) and line up all the motion(s) (included
> >>>> seconded ones) for a vote by 8:16am PST / 11:16am EST / 16:16 UTC
> >>>> tomorrow 2008.02.05 (i.e. 1-day after we originally meant to start
> >>>> voting.)
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks & regards. =ppy
> >>>>
> >>>> P.S. by the way, there is still only one motion out there, stiil.
> >> =ppy
> >>>> --
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Feb 4, 2008 10:32 AM, Duane Nickull <dnickull@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Motion made to adopt these definitions instead:
> >>>
> >>>>> 1. An Ontology repository is a facility or facilities where
> > ontology
> >> related
> >>>>> artifacts may be persisted and retrieved.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2. An Ontology Registry is where metadata can be declared governing
> >> the
> >>>>> storage, semantics, ownership and access policies for artifacts
> >> persisted in
> >>>>> the ontology repository.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Any seconders?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Duane
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Feb 4, 2008 9:06 AM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>> Denise and Duane,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I appreciate your new input.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Since we have moved beyond the debate/discussion window[1], and
> > your
> >>>>> proposals are clear enough to not require much further discourse,
> >> may
> >>>>> I suggest you each make a formal motion, and get a second to your
> >>>>> proposed definition, and we move forward from there (and have
> > people
> >>>>> vote on them.)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [1] ref.
> >>>>>
> >> http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/2008-01/msg00018.html#nid05
> >>>>> &
> >>>>>
> >> http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/2008-02/msg00000.html#nid02
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks & regards. =ppy
> >>>>> --
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>> On Feb 4, 2008 8:16 AM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>> All,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Since we have not received alternate candidates, there is only one
> >>>>>> candidate definition put forth, by the attendees of the
> > 23-Jan-2008
> >>>>>> OOR Founding Members meeting, for "Ontology Repository," which
> >> reads:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "An ontology repository is a facility where ontologies and
> >> related
> >>>>>> information artifacts can be stored, retrieved and managed."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We will open this up for voting (please do so by responding to
> > this
> >>>>>> thread) in the next 48 hours (two working-days.)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Let us try to get general consent and summarily adopt this if we
> >> can:
> >>>>>> ... If we do not receive two (2) or more objections to adopting
> >> the
> >>>>>> above, we will summarily adopt this definition for the
> >>>>>> OpenOntologyRepository (OOR) initiative. If there are two (2) or
> >> more
> >>>>>> people objecting to the adoption, we will put it to a vote, and
> >>>>>> require a two-third majority (given it's importance) to adopt this
> >>>>>> definition.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (While declaring positive support is always welcomed, if you are
> >> not
> >>>>>> raising an "objection" you do not necessarily have to cast your
> >> vote
> >>>>>> of support at this point.)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks & regards. =ppy
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> P.S. since we are doing this for the first time here, any
> >>>>>> comments/suggestions on the process is also welcomed. I am just
> >> going
> >>>>>> by what we usually do at ONTOLOG. =ppy
> >>>>>> --
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>> On Feb 4, 2008 7:29 AM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Thank you, ...[snip]...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Focusing on the subject matter (i.e. trying to get a (set of)
> >> definition adopted), do we have:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> (a) alternate candidate definition(s) that anyone else want to
> > put
> >> forth for "Ontology Repository" ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> (b) any other definitions one may want to propose for adoption
> >> together with "Ontology Repository" (maybe "OntologyRegistry" ?) as a
> >> set?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please bring it up now (and quickly, along with someone to second
> >> the motion). We will be putting the whole subject matter to a vote in
> > 20
> >> minutes.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks & regards. =ppy
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>> On Feb 4, 2008 1:43 AM, Dennis Nicholson
> >> <d.m.nicholson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> ...[snip]...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I'm sending this to you for information ...[snip]...
> >>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>> Dennis Nicholson
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>>> From: oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>>>> [mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Peter
> >> Yim
> >>>>>>>> Sent: 01 February 2008 15:48
> >>>>>>>> To: OpenOntologyRepository-discussion
> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [oor-forum] Defining "Ontology Repository" (maybe
> >>>>>>>> "OntologyRegistry" too) for the OOR Initiative
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Folks,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The seven days we set aside for discussion has come and gone,
> > and
> >> 16 or so
> >>>>>>>> exchanges were made on the subject matter. It is about time to
> >> bring this to
> >>>>>>>> closure.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> So far we still have only one (well formed) proposed candidate
> >> for our
> >>>>>>>> definition of "Ontology Repository," and that is:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Candidate-(A): "An ontology repository is a facility where
> >>>>>>>> ontologies and related information artifacts can be stored,
> >> retrieved and
> >>>>>>>> managed."
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I'll wait 3 calendar days for anyone to propose and second other
> >> candidates.
> >>>>>>>> Past this time next Monday 2008.02.04, we will put things to a
> >> vote.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I concur with Lee that:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Lee Feigenbaum wrote an 23, 2008 10:08 PM EST
> >>>>>>>>> [LF] there was a consensus understanding in general of the
> >>>>>>>>> distinction between a repository and a registry -- if we agree
> >> on a
> >>>>>>>>> definition for a repository (which is our end goal, if I
> >> understand
> >>>>>>>>> the project correctly :-), then perhaps we do not need to
> >> belabor a
> >>>>>>>>> definition of ontology registry as well
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I think the documented discussion during our Jan-23 meeting on
> >> what a
> >>>>>>>> "registry" is (ref.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OOR/ConferenceCall_2008_01_23#ni
> >> d17U
> >>>>>>>> R
> >>>>>>>> ) is enough to allow us to move forward.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Therefore, if you have alternative candidate definitions for
> >> "Ontology
> >>>>>>>> Repository", please response to this message and make a motion
> >> for its
> >>>>>>>> adoption by this team. Please try to find someone to second your
> >> motion too.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks & regards. =ppy
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> P.S. Once again, I hope we can just summarily adopt the above
> >> definition
> >>>>>>>> (if there are no alternative proposals, and no objections) and
> > go
> >> forward.
> >>>>>>>> =ppy
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>>> On Jan 23, 2008 12:02 PM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> In particular, were made an attempt (and came close) to
> >> adopting a
> >>>>>>>>>> definition for "ontology repository" (possibly even "ontology
> >>>>>>>>>> registry"), but decided to put this up for asynchronous
> >> discussion
> >>>>>>>>>> deliberation due to time constraints.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Ref.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OOR/ConferenceCall_2008_01_23#
> >>>>>>>>> nid17US
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> We were close ... (and have got to):
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "An ontology repository is a facility where ontologies and
> >> related
> >>>>>>>>> information artifacts can be stored, retrieved and managed."
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Let's open this up for discussion and then put it to a vote
> >> after 7
> >>>>>>>>> calendar days (from the time-stamp of this message).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Feel free to attempt defining "ontology registry" or "registry"
> >> too.
> >>>>>>>>> If we are getting close, we'll adopt that as well.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thanks & regards. =ppy
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >>>>>>>>> From: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>>>>> Date: Jan 23, 2008 11:55 AM
> >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [oor-forum] Founding Members Meeting of the Open
> >> Ontology
> >>>>>>>>> Repository (OOR) Initiative - Wed 2008.01.23
> >>>>>>>>> To: oor-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> We had a very fruitful meeting today, thanks to all who were
> >> able to join
> >>>>>>>> us.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> For those who were able to call in, the proceedings are
> > captured
> >> at
> >>>>>>>>> the session page at:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OOR/ConferenceCall_2008_01_23
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> In particular, were made an attempt (and came close) to
> > adopting
> >> a
> >>>>>>>>> definition for "ontology repository" (possibly even "ontology
> >>>>>>>>> registry"), but decided to put this up for asynchronous
> >> discussion
> >>>>>>>>> deliberation due to time constraints. (I'll start a thread on
> >> this in
> >>>>>>>>> a moment.)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Very encouraging is the fact that the NIST-Ontology-NCOR-...
> >>>>>>>>> co-organized "OntologySummit2008" has adopted "Toward An Open
> >> Ontology
> >>>>>>>>> Repository" as the main theme this year. We are looking forward
> >> to
> >>>>>>>>> bootstrap from that initiative. Ideas as to how we could do it
> >> would
> >>>>>>>>> be welcome.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Our next call is scheduled for Wed 2008.02.13 - 1.5 Hr.
> > starting
> >> at:
> >>>>>>>>> 1pm PST / 4pm EST / 21:00 GMT/UTC.
> >>>>>>>>> Please mark your calendars now and refer to details at the wiki
> >>>>>>>>> session page (closer to the time) at:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OOR/ConferenceCall_2008_02_13
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Look forward to having you all at the next meeting.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Regards. =ppy
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>
> >>> _________________________________________________________________
> >>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/
> >>> Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> Config/Unsubscribe:
> >> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/
> >>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/
> >>> Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository
> >>>
> >>
> >> _________________________________________________________________
> >> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/
> >> Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Config/Unsubscribe:
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/
> >>
> >> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/
> >> Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository
> >>
> >>
> >> _________________________________________________________________
> >> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/
> >> Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Config/Unsubscribe:
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/
> >> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/
> >> Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository
>
> --
> **********************************************************************
> "Speaking only for myself"
> Senior Technical Evangelist - Adobe Systems, Inc.
> Blog - http://technoracle.blogspot.com
> Community Music - http://www.mix2r.com
> My Band - http://www.myspace.com/22ndcentury
> Adobe MAX 2008 - http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2007/08/adobe-max-2008.html
> **********************************************************************
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/
> Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/
> Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository
> (07)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/
Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository (08)
|