Dear Peter, (01)
I agree, the effort of creating a more general meta-ontology for ontology
classification should get the widest possible community attention - if we can
get some key players involved this could have real impact. (02)
Best, Oliver (03)
On 25 Jul 2013, at 01:15, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote: (04)
> Dear Oliver,
>
> That sounds great!
>
> What I am inclined towards, is for us (OOR core team members) to plan
> out an open virtual session during an OOR team confcall (which will
> only be attended by a few of us), when we can invite a broader
> community (say, people from ONTOLOG, IAOA, BioPortal, SOCoP, etc.)
> and, in particular, more people with diverse views, to chime in on
> what's best to do.
>
> It would be wonderful to have a proposal (as a baseline, to build
> upon), drafted before that open session!
>
> Thanks & regards. =ppy
> --
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Oliver Kutz
> <okutz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> ideally we find slot for this that works for all of us - I won't be able to
>participate on the 30th as I will be in the air flying to China. A brief
>discussion in that call could be useful, otherwise we can use August to
>develop our proposal a bit further and discuss a more refined version in the
>September call.
>>
>> Best, Oliver
>
>
>> On 24 Jul 2013, at 21:39, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Tills,
>>>
>>> Oops ... I did mean Tue 2013.09.03.
>>>
>>> We definitely want you around when we discuss this. We could try to
>>> tacle this at a later call (or even, briefly at least, if the right
>>> people are present) at the call next Tue (7/30) - OOR-Hackathon-n.03
>>> on "API".
>>>
>>> Regards. =ppy
>>> --
>
>
>>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Till Mossakowski
>>> <Till.Mossakowski@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Dear Peter,
>>>>
>>>> do you mean Tue 2013.09.03?
>>>> Then I am in Warsaw at a conference. Not sure whether I will be able to
>>>> participate, but maybe if suffices if Aleksandra and Oliver can.
>>>>
>>>> Best, Till
>
>
>>>> Am 24.07.2013 21:05, schrieb Peter Yim:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Till & Aleksandra,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you. We can discuss this a bit more at our next OOR Team
>>>>> (admin/planning) conference call, which is scheduled for Tue
>>>>> 2013.09.02. Let's remember to include this into the agenda for that
>>>>> meeting.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks & regards. =ppy
>>>>> --
>
>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:18 PM, Till Mossakowski
>>>>> <Till.Mossakowski@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Peter,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this is a good idea!
>>>>>> In particular, the meta ontology could be refined at various places, but
>>>>>> this should only be done at those places where there are real ontologies
>>>>>> that wait for classification...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best, Till
>
>
>>>>>> Am 23.07.2013 18:53, schrieb Peter Yim:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nice work! Thank you, Till & Aleksandra.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now that we have a good "starting point," we probably should devote a
>>>>>>> session (say, a Joint Session with interested collaborators), in the
>>>>>>> not-too-distant future, to discuss where to go, from here, and get
>>>>>>> input from the broader community.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks & regards. =ppy
>>>>>>> --
>
>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Till Mossakowski
>>>>>>> <Till.Mossakowski@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Aleksandra Sojic has created a first version of the meta ontology, see
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>https://github.com/ontohub/OOR_Ontohub_API/blob/master/Domain_fields.owl
>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>> use "raw" for downloading and viewing with Protégé:
>>>>>>>> https://raw.github.com/ontohub/OOR_Ontohub_API/master/Domain_fields.owl
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This ontology provides a meta-classification that according to the
>>>>>>>> domain
>>>>>>>> subjects distributes domain-ontologies into the domain-specific
>>>>>>>> classes.
>>>>>>>> As
>>>>>>>> the reference classification we have considered several international
>>>>>>>> standards which are used to classify domain fields. The International
>>>>>>>> Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) has been selected as the
>>>>>>>> most
>>>>>>>> appropriate reference for the specification of the (subject) categories
>>>>>>>> within the OntoHub. ISCED is a member of the United Nations
>>>>>>>> International
>>>>>>>> Family of Economic and Social Classifications and is the reference
>>>>>>>> classification for organizing education programmes and related
>>>>>>>> qualifications by levels and fields of education (ref. ISCED). In
>>>>>>>> particular, we have used the last version of ISCED (the final draft
>>>>>>>> published in June 2013) as it provides a hierarchy of knowledge domains
>>>>>>>> suitable for covering comprehensively the corresponding
>>>>>>>> ontology-modelling
>>>>>>>> fields.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Domain-fields-ontology has to be developed further in order to
>>>>>>>> include
>>>>>>>> several other specifications, especially considering the domains which
>>>>>>>> experience a significant expansion in the ontology development, e.g.
>>>>>>>> Life
>>>>>>>> Sciences.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please find attached a graphical visualisation of the recently
>>>>>>>> published
>>>>>>>> Domain-fields ontology.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best, Till
>
>
>>>>>>>> Am 29.05.2013 21:30, schrieb matthew lange:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We aren't taking the lead
>>>>>>>>> in this categorization effort but if a standard (defacto or not)
>>>>>>>>> does
>>>>>>>>> arise we would be interested in adapting our system to use it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Watching this thread, and interested as well...do you have a reference
>>>>>>>>> for who is heading this up?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Ray Fergerson
>>>>>>>>> <ray.fergerson@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ray.fergerson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oliver,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Worth pointing out is that we (the NCBO team) don't feel that
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>>> BioPortal categorization is very good. It should probably not be
>>>>>>>>> used
>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>> the basis for anything. There are external efforts to produce a
>>>>>>>>> categorization system for the biomedical domain. We aren't
>>>>>>>>> taking
>>>>>>>>> the lead
>>>>>>>>> in this categorization effort but if a standard (defacto or not)
>>>>>>>>> does
>>>>>>>>> arise we would be interested in adapting our system to use it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ray
>
>
>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>> From: oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>>> [mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>] On Behalf Of Till
>>>>>>>>> Mossakowski
>>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 12:14 AM
>>>>>>>>> To: oor-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:oor-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>>> Cc: Oliver Kutz
>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [oor-forum] Categories for ontologies
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> P.S.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the interesting question is then: what happens if we federate
>>>>>>>>> BioPortal
>>>>>>>>> with SOCoP? We need a taxonomy including all the involved
>>>>>>>>> categories, such
>>>>>>>>> that in the ontology browser, all the BioPortal categories are
>>>>>>>>> combined
>>>>>>>>> into one category "biology" (which can be expanded into the
>>>>>>>>> BioPortal
>>>>>>>>> categories on demand).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Till
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 29.05.2013 08:53, schrieb Till Mossakowski:
>>>>>>>>>> Am 29.05.2013 00:29, schrieb John F Sowa:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/28/2013 4:27 PM, Till Mossakowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> After all, the user wants to use *one* ontology or
>>>>>>>>> classification
>>>>>>>>>>>> system for classifying ontologies.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What do you mean "one classification system"?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In BioPortal, when the user uploads a new ontology, (s)he can
>>>>>>>>> provide
>>>>>>>>>> some categories classifying the ontology. When browsing all
>>>>>>>>>> ontologies, you can also filter them by category.
>>>>>>>>>> The possible categories are: Animal Development, Biological
>>>>>>>>> Process,
>>>>>>>>>> Human, Plant, Yeast, Cell etc. (Btw, not all categories
>>>>>>>>> returned
>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>> the REST service can be selected for browsing.) The OOR
>>>>>>>>> instance
>>>>>>>>>> http://mercury-ncbo.ornl.gov seems to (erroneously) use the
>>>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>>>>> categories In the OOR instance http://socop.oor.net, the
>>>>>>>>> categories
>>>>>>>>>> are (exhaustive
>>>>>>>>>> list): Commercial, Cultural, Defense, Financial, Geospatial,
>>>>>>>>>> Government, Literature, Metadata, Other, Process, Provenance,
>>>>>>>>> Science,
>>>>>>>>>> Social Networking, Standards, Technology, Upper Ontologies.
>>>>>>>>>> I now just wonder what we should do for Ontohub.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The number of different kinds of ontologies, their purposes,
>>>>>>>>> goals,
>>>>>>>>>>> applications, levels, logics, notations, uses, etc., is
>>>>>>>>> open-ended.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Suppose that somebody asked you to compare Cyc to BFO to the
>>>>>>>>> Good
>>>>>>>>>>> Relations ontology to schema.org <http://schema.org>. Where
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> would you begin? And why?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It is not about comparing ontologies. It is just that the
>>>>>>>>> "filter
>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>> category" dropdown box on the browsing web page needs to show
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> finite
>>>>>>>>>> list of options to the user...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Best, Till
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Prof. Dr. Till Mossakowski Cartesium, room 2.51 Phone
>>>>>>>>> +49-421-218-64226 <tel:%2B49-421-218-64226>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> DFKI GmbH Bremen Fax
>>>>>>>>> +49-421-218-9864226
>>>>>>>>> <tel:%2B49-421-218-9864226>
>>>>>>>>> Cyber-Physical Systems Till.Mossakowski@xxxxxxx
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:Till.Mossakowski@xxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Enrique-Schmidt-Str. 5, D-28359 Bremen
>>>>>>>>> http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~till/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Kuenstliche Intelligenz GmbH
>>>>>>>>> principal
>>>>>>>>> office, *not* the address for mail etc.!!!:
>>>>>>>>> Trippstadter Str. 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern management board:
>>>>>>>>> Prof.
>>>>>>>>> Wolfgang Wahlster (chair), Dr. Walter Olthoff supervisory board:
>>>>>>>>> Prof.
>>>>>>>>> Hans A. Aukes (chair) Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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 (05)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (06)
|