Thanks, Gary and all: sorry I could not participate in this. As
always: very interested, but sometimes lack time.
Dr. Leo Obrst The MITRE Corporation, Information
lobrst@xxxxxxxxx Information Discovery & Understanding,
Command & Control Center
Voice: 703-983-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S H305
Fax: 703-983-1379 McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA
[mailto:socop-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gary
Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 5:08 PM
To: Socop Forum
Subject: [socop-forum] Draft minutes from April 21st SOCoP Meeting
Meeting Minutes from Wednesday April 21, 2010 from 11:00 - 12:00 EDT
Attendees/Participants John Moeller
(NG), Gary (Knowledge Strategies), Carl Diebert (Sandia Labs), Laura Reese
(TASC), Todd Pehle (Orbis Technologies), Josh Liebermann (Traverse
Technologies), Dave Kolas (BBN ), James Wilson (JMU ) Nancy (U of Wisconsin )
Following Introductions the following were
1. There was no update on USGS
integrated National Map (TNM) data becoming available except that the data
is not yet available for use in the demo, but is expected to be so soon.
2. Workplan for 2010 including
on planning for a good presentation/demo for USGIF (US Geospatial Intelligence
Emerging Technologies Tech Days at Hyatt in Reston. John provided info on
activities for the week. See http://usgif.org/events/2010/5/76-usgif-workshop-series-motion-imagery-workshop
Events start at 9 so we should get there
early to check out laptops.
Gary will send out info on this event and
others in a separate email.
John described the 30 minute time block
with 20 of presentation (15 for demo) and 10 for Q and A. The first part, which
Gary might present sets the context for the demo giving a SOCoP background
including past activities and the plan for 2010. This would probably include
some thoughts on the Reference Model and targets for the remainder of year.
As Todd describes it the demo should help
illustrate the potential and continuing advancement of spatial data integration
technology. The SOCoP
in developing a demonstration is to showcase geospatial intelligence through
the use of “Linked Data”.
The demo will use a “geo/spatial sparql” in
the SAIL which is functioning fine. Todd is converting small samples of some
U.S.-based open source geo data (USGS Geonames, Census, Linked Geo Data [Open
Street Map], maybe others) into RDF and will host these as SPARQL endpoint(s).
As time permits he also would like to have some Social Web data, perhaps
DBPedia wiki data, few blogs marked up in RDFa, etc.
John suggests illustrating integrating data
of different type from a variety of open sources. It was agreed that US based
data would be focus.
(This expansion may be ready for the June demo)
The idea is then to showcase the semantic
linking, search and discovery that is possible across multiple heterogeneous
datasets whether Geo Web data or Social Web data. In regard to our Reference
Model (RM) the demo capability described above is possible because it leverages
W3C- RDF and OGC GML geometry standards.
For the presentation layer Todd is “hacking
out” a simple GUI that will have an Open
Layers map and perhaps a few other widgets
to demonstrate. The demonstration will “link” disparate Geo Web data together
with Social Web data in a uniform manner providing better search and easier
search of geospatial information. By utilizing common vocabularies and
semantics defined using W3C and OGC standards, the demonstration will show the
potential increase in geospatial intelligence by increasing geo-semantic interoperability.
doesn’t yet have data persistent on the web, but the demo for Tech days should
be together by Thursday May 20th, without TNM data hosted up yet.
To help focus his effort Todd asked about
the type of audience that comes. John noted that it is a mix of technical and
program so the presentation should be a mix.
Todd would like to address linked data by
example and noted that what is often overlooked is how it works. You see a
search of a query and boom and answer. But what happens? He will try to address
this for a mixed audience.
Currently there is no fixed scenario and
there is a chicken and egg issue of which comes first - a scenario or data. We
have already had some discussion on various data sources. Practically we could
develop a scenario first or settle on the core data.
Todd asked about connectivity at Tech
Days. He has had trouble in the past using a live internet connection. John
will try to enable him to access the data locally. John will check to see if
others are using it.
To be conservative Todd proposed a three
part approach – live, local and a video which pulls down a sample of the demo
as a backup. For the demo he will wrap up a few virtual machines on his PC.
But he will have tested a distributed system and may have a video of this.
Plans for moving forward include checking
on status each week to mature the scenario and data set.
Todd had a question using the Parliament
triple store server (http://parliament.semwebcentral.org/)
that BBN Tech developed and is now open source. Dave was able to say that
there are no restriction. Todd will download this and ill also let us know next
week how things are progressing.
an update on plans for June OGC (14th – 18th) meeting
and the Geosemantics DWG part of this. John asked Josh what he was planning
on doing there and a relation to the RM.
Josh indicated that there was not much
progress on this because semantics hasn’t been too hot a topic. Instead MMI
area has been looking at vocabulary and mappings to enhance work. Josh has
developed some concepts to go into these. GeoSparql is part of this – e.g.
exploiting the operators. This work is also representing maps and
geo-expansions. One part of OGC that needs work is simple features that have
operators and represent things. A question that has come up is what does it
mean to link features? How are they and sub-features related?
This is the novel part of RM to work on –
the maturing of features. Once we get/link to the feature what else can we get
Carl liked this direction. He suggested
that we need a abstract concept like “exclusion zone” that are outside of
geospatial. We are interested in this type of “expansion”.
To proceed efficiently Josh need to set up
a collaboration space we can utilize. Right now this discussion and material
is on the OGC portal. Josh proposed discussed this further with Gary and Todd
to set something up more mutually available so SOCoP members can utilize it.
John can check with Mark on using OGC space but Josh saw a few possibilities .
· The first is the
OGC network – which is not currently visible to. There is a version that is
visible but not editable
· The 2nd
is doing the pilot in a Google site.
Gary could also set up a page under RM on
Ontolog and he agreed to do that as an interim effort till the other options
are explored to see if they are better. Gary will follow up with Josh on the
agenda and how it relates to our RM.
Gary pointed out that we will probably need
a WG meeting in between now and the next meeting for further development of a
reference model and OGC collaboration.
3.Status of NSF INTEROP
proposal (Nancy Wiegand). No word back, but the program officer has changed
from Philip Bogden to Mimi McClure.
Josh indicated that some proposals have
been turned down (GS dynamics proposal with U of GA and others) the week before
4. Other Items/New
Gary invited Laura to offer ideas for
upcoming meetings. The Demo is the 20th so maybe we would have
a short meeting after that to provide status. Alternaterivey we might do
without one and have notes on the meeting for people to read and see the
Josh suggested that he might use the June
OGC meeting as a “summit” for joint work with SOCoP, say Wed. June
16th . Carl asked if are non-members invited? It was noted that they
normally are not, but that government membership is cheap.
They have has such summit sessions on
particular topics with small fee for none members. Also they could have a
telecom line in for people who couldn’t attend.
SOCoP Executive Secretary