OntologySummit2011 (Pre-launch) Community Input and Planning Session - Thu 2010-12-16    (2JZB)

Conference Call Details    (2K4B)

Attendees:    (2K5A)

Abstract:    (2K5I)

The upcoming Ontology Summit is co-organized by Ontolog, NIST, NCOR, NCBO, IAOA, NCO-NITRD ...    (2K6S)

This is the 6th year we are organizing this annual, international, open OntologySummit event. The general format of the event comprises a series of both virtual and face-to-face activities that span about 3 months (January through March or April each year). These activities include a vigorous three-month online discourse on the theme of the Summit, virtual panel discussions, research activities, and so on, which will culminate in a two-day face-to-face workshop and symposium at NIST in Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA. Each year, we publish a Summit Communiqué to offer a message from the Summit participants to the world-at-large as a signature activity of the Ontology Summit series.    (2K5J)

This is a (pre-launch) communitywide brainstorming and planning session for those who are passionate about the subject and would like to influence and help drive the outcome by helping refine the ideas, organization and process, around our challenge of OntologySummit2011: "Making the Case for Ontology."    (2K5K)

During this session the Ontology Summit community will get together to discuss the theme, brainstorm on ideas, candidate program, solicit commitments, and make a attempt to get organized for this upcoming Ontology Summit.    (2K5L)

At this point, the theme is characterized as follows:    (2K6T)

This summit will collect and curate a small number of perspectives and case studies for which we will strive to assemble ROI information (monetary and otherwise) as well as statements of the problem and solution approach, in support of providing solid material to draw upon when making the business case for both the application as well as the R&D investment in Ontology.    (2K6U)

Subthemes – Groups of participants making the case in the following domains:    (2K6V)

While the original premise was for making the case in a return-on-investment basis, the suggestion has been made that this question could also be framed in terms of making the case:    (2K74)

Possible metrics include:    (2K79)

Our developing 2011 Ontology Summit home page is at: OntologySummit2011    (2K6O)

Agenda & Proceedings:    (2K5S)

0. Participant self-introduction (if size of participants is manageable) (15~30 seconds each)    (2KCC)

1. Introduction and ideas – SteveRay (co-chair) - [ slides ]    (2K5T)

2. Open floor for even more ideas on developing and executing the program (All) -- please refer to process above    (2K5U)

Brainstorming on ideas that support the "Making the Case for Ontology" theme    (2K5V)

o Topics, Speakers, Invitees, Sponsors, Publicity ... and more    (2K5W)

o Crafting a program that will allow us to "make the case for Ontology."    (2K6P)

o Approach and Execution    (2K6Q)

3. A call for volunteers ... and, getting ourselves organized.    (2K5X)

4. Summary and wrap-up (co-chair)    (2K5Y)

Proceedings:    (2K5Z)

Please refer to the above    (2K60)

IM Chat Transcript captured during the session:    (2K61)

 see raw transcript here.    (2KCY)
 (for better clarity, the version below is a re-organized and lightly edited chat-transcript.)
 Participants are welcome to make light edits to their own contributions as they see fit.    (2KCZ)
	PeterYim: .    (2K63)
	Welcome to the OntologySummit2011 (Pre-launch) Community Input and Planning Session - Thu 2010-12-16    (2KKY)
	* Topic: Refining the ideas around theme and program 
	         for OntologySummit2011: "Making the Case for Ontology"    (2KKZ)
	* Co-chair: Dr. SteveRay & Dr. NicolaGuarino    (2KL0)
	* see details on session page 
	  at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2010_12_16    (2KL1)
	.    (2KL2)
	anonymous morphed into JimDisbrow    (2KL3)
	anonymous morphed into JimRhyne    (2KL4)
	anonymous1 morphed into GerryRadack    (2KL5)
	anonymous morphed into NancyWiegand    (2KL6)
	anonymous morphed into RexBrooks    (2KL7)
	Matthew West morphed into MatthewWest    (2KL8)
	Nicolaguarino2 morphed into NicolaGuarino    (2KL9)
	anonymous2 morphed into MichaelUschold    (2KLA)
	ToddSchneider: Need to add some items to 'themes' that represent the enterprise architectural 
	approach and how ontologies and semantic technologies fit into the larger picture.    (2KLB)
	anonymous2 morphed into RamSriram    (2KLC)
	anonymous2 morphed into RalphHodgson    (2KLD)
	PeterYim: Steve: == how does the week of April 18, 2011 work == ... as a potential time for our 
	OntologySummit2011 symposium (the final 2-day face-to-face workshop). Any conflicts we know of now?    (2KLE)
	ToddSchneider: April is so far in advance, sure it sounds good.    (2KLF)
	RalphHodgson: ISWSA 2011, Amman, Jordan - 
	http://www.wikicfp.com/cfp/servlet/event.showcfp?eventid=11367&copyownerid=15408    (2KLG)
	RalphHodgson: http://iswsa.ipu.edu.jo/index.php?c=cfp.htm    (2KLH)
	ToddSchneider: So, who's traveling to Jordan in April?    (2KLI)
	RalphHodgson: I only found one more event that conflicts: BioPAX - 
	http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/biopax/index.php?title=Main_Page    (2KLJ)
	NicolaGuarino: [ref. slide#3] There is also IAOA as co-organizer...    (2KLK)
	PeterYim: @Nicola - my apologies for inadvertently leaving out IAOA on that slide ... the slide deck 
	on the session page has now been updated (to reflect the correction)    (2KLL)
	ToddSchneider: Steve, can we get a video link running from NIST?    (2KLM)
	SteveRay: @Todd: I'll raise your request for a NIST video link to our NIST hosts.    (2KLN)
	ToddSchneider: In addition to a communique, we should consider providing a place where people could 
	find case studies and success stories (subject to the Ontolog IPR policy).    (2KLO)
	PeterYim: Steve: == please provide suggestions for themes/subtheme, tracks and successful cases that 
	we can pursue ==    (2KLP)
	NicolaGuarino: Theme 1: commercial or societal need...    (2KLQ)
	ToddSchneider: Also have to address how ontologies fit into the bigger picture: How to use them.    (2KLR)
	NicolaGuarino: @Todd: yes, but first we have to show the importance of them...    (2KLS)
	ToddSchneider: The value or importance will depend on how they are used.    (2KLT)
	GaryBergCross: I find the "benefits" a bit commercially focused. This is clearly important but there 
	are other communities that can profit from use in R&D for example. Perhaps it is the focus on 
	practical use that leads in this direction.    (2KLU)
	SteveRay: @Gary: I think there is room when defining metrics for including research value as well as 
	commercial considerations.    (2KLV)
	PeterYim: Nicola: "Scaling" issues could be one that is of interest ... and is being given attention 
	in Europe    (2KLW)
	ToddSchneider: Nicola, the scaling problem involves more than just particular technologies. But how 
	they are used.    (2KLX)
	RalphHodgson: Ontologies as specification models, as inferencing systems for classification, as 
	basis for model-based reasoning, as process orchestration engines, as vocabulary management systems, 
	...    (2KLY)
	ToddSchneider: Ralph [in his verbal remarks] has just enumerated many of the tracks. Or at least the 
	various aspects that should be addressed.    (2KLZ)
	RalphHodgson: Use of ontologies at BBC for the Worldcup 2010 was onotologies as flexible data model 
	+ aggregation capabilities of RDF/OWL    (2KM0)
	ToddSchneider: Ralph, would TopQuadrant be able to provide some case studies?    (2KM1)
	RalphHodgson: Yes    (2KM2)
	LeoObrst: Electronic commerce is another application domain. Many starts in this area, recently 
	GoodRelations.    (2KM3)
	SteveRay: So I'm hearing we might want to have a track identifying all the different kinds of 
	application classes    (2KM4)
	GaryBergCross: The categories are not mutually exclusive. So sociotechnical systems [from 
	NicolaGuarino's remarks] describe an approach to complex organizational work design that recognizes 
	the interaction between people and technology in workplaces. Health care has lots of such 
	interactions.    (2KM5)
	ToddSchneider: Steve, identifying all application classes may not be beneficial. Most domains can 
	benefit.    (2KM6)
	RexBrooks: Let's not forget emergency management and military applications since we have the largest 
	market of multi-national corporations, many of which already have put their toes into the ontology 
	pond.    (2KM7)
	RalphHodgson: @Todd - use of ontologies at Netherlands MoJ for CCTS-based XML Schema Message 
	building for interoperability in the Justice Domain, use of ontologies at NASA for Units of Measure 
	(QUDT) and for Telemetry, Commanding for Space Interoperability (TCMX)    (2KM8)
	ToddSchneider: Perhaps, a partition based on lifecycle (in the context of sales pitch)    (2KM9)
	RexBrooks: Making the case to those multi-nationals could open doors to research funding for our 
	ontological needs.    (2KMA)
	SteveRay: We have had some concrete examples identified via email: Lloyds Bank Human Resources; a 
	technical support call center; an ERP data quality application    (2KMB)
	DeborahMacPherson: I believe making the case for ontologies to build bridges from relational 
	databases to web services and data repositories will appeal to a wide audience.    (2KMC)
	anonymous1 morphed into JohnSowa    (2KMD)
	MichaelUschold: The following paper suggests a framework for understanding classifying ontology 
	applications. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=    (2KME)
	GaryBergCross: The value proposition (benefit) often becomes very rapidly a cost-benefit 
	calculation. So lowering the "cost" of good semantics is an important part of making this "sales 
	pitch".    (2KMF)
	RalphHodgson: I posted some slides here on customer case studies - 
	http://www.scribd.com/doc/40220051/TQ-TBS-Customer-Case-Studies-aRH-v4    (2KMG)
	RexBrooks: It would be helpful if we had an ontology of value models of special or particular 
	interest for various domains could be quickly referenced. That way we have a better chance of 
	speaking to any given market's interest and values.    (2KMH)
	MikeBennett: Possible case: financial industry - common terms and definitions as industry benefit; 
	also regulatory reform.    (2KMI)
	MichaelUschold: Section three of the following paper considers varoius roles and value propositions 
	for ontologies. "Ontologies: principles, methods and applications" - 
	http://starlab.vub.ac.be/teaching/uschold.pdf    (2KMJ)
	MatthewWest: I think it is worth considering the situations in which ontologies can add value. These 
	include: - When definitions need to be shared across (or within) organizations - When data needs to 
	be shared between disparate systems - when information needs to be provided in a more timely manner 
	and inferencing will provide the automation that will provide that timeliness    (2KMK)
	RalphHodgson: @Matthew - see slide 22 of 
	http://www.scribd.com/doc/40220051/TQ-TBS-Customer-Case-Studies-aRH-v4 for a 2 by 2 on "Putting 
	Ontologies to Work"    (2KML)
	MatthewWest: @Ralph - yes that covers most of the things I have.    (2KMM)
	PeterYim: please review some of the guideline I've posted earlier today (as rules of engagement) - 
	http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/2010-12/msg00095.html    (2KMN)
	PeterYim: I have two process ideas to suggest: (a) building a collection of sound-bites and quotable 
	quotes (to help make our case), (b) Making the Case, for and against, Ontology in an IQ-squared 
	style debate and measuring success by seeing how many minds each side is able to change (ref. 
	http://intelligencesquaredus.org/index.php/about-us) ... debater nominations solicited    (2KMO)
	ToddSchneider: Peter, with or without beer?    (2KMP)
	PeterYim: @Todd - without beer ... we might get too incoherent for ontologists otherwise    (2KMQ)
	MikeBennett: Theme: Ontology as business conceptual model versus Ontology as component of a solution 
	(there is case to be made for each)    (2KMR)
	ToddSchneider: Unfortunately, this problem space (the sales pitch) seems to have multiple orthogonal 
	dimensions    (2KMS)
	GaryBergCross: In SOCoP (geospatial Apps) there's an agreement that Country Codes offers a simple 
	opportunity to show the value of ontologies. Among the reason underlie this agreement that there is 
	a need to address a real problem of different country code being used in US Agencies as well as 
	internationally due to new ISO Standards and the expiration of the US FIPS standard. Work groups are 
	now seeking was of implementing regional codes and of cross walking between old codes and new. So 
	ontologies and semantics can be an effective part of the solution and can be incorporated into 
	current geospatial services for discovery, query, display and publishing.    (2KMT)
	MichaelUschold: Ideas for Suggested Tracks    (2KMU)
	1.Design a framework for describing and characterizing ontology applications that everyone can fill 
	out and be basis of a catalog. 2.Analysis of case studies: what worked, what did not and why, 
	lessons learned 3.Considering various roles and value propositions for ontologies a.Ontology driven 
	information systems b.Ontology for search applications c.Ontology for interoperability 4.Based on 
	Industry Sectors catalog of ontology applications a.Life Sciences b.Finance c.Media etc. 5.Measuring 
	the value considering metrics etc.    (2KMV)
	ToddSchneider: Have to go. Thank you. I'll champion aspects of architecture, if needed.    (2KMW)
	SteveRay: What I heard RalphHodgson suggest: 1. Presenting what an ontology is 2. Capability cases 
	3. Barriers    (2KMX)
	MatthewWest: The benefits come from improving the clarity, consistency, and timeliness of 
	information used in key decisions. If you look for examples of where bad decisions have been made, 
	you can often find that a lack of these was a contributory factor, and the cost of the bad decision 
	is often all too available.    (2KMY)
	MikeBennett: @Matthew you mean like the fall-out from the financial crisis?    (2KMZ)
	GaryBergCross: I agree with MichaelUschold on the value of designing a framework for describing and 
	characterizing ontology applications but our examples might address benefits for government and 
	education as well as "commercial needs".    (2KN0)
	RalphHodgson: @Michael - +1 to all your suggestions    (2KN1)
	GaryBergCross: So do we have a track on Best Practices for Success?    (2KN2)
	MatthewWest: @Mike - yes, and some problems with oil in the wrong place in the Gulf of Mexico.    (2KN3)
	RexBrooks: Much of these studies and frameworks are examples of what I meant by the need for a value 
	model ontology, an ontology of value models, perhaps by application domain.    (2KN4)
	anonymous1 morphed into PavithraKenjige    (2KN5)
	PeterYim: there are 3 Mike's on the call, please refer to them with their full name (in WikiWord 
	format)    (2KN6)
	GerryRadack: Ontology for data quality.    (2KN7)
	NicolaGuarino: I support Michael's proposal very much. Just a couple of remarks:    (2KN8)
	GaryBergCross: I hope that we have a Panel "track" as well as talks to discuss some of this at the 
	Summit.    (2KN9)
	RalphHodgson: @MichaelUshold - great ideas - +1    (2KNA)
	anonymous morphed into PavithraKenjige    (2KNB)
	MatthewWest: The Oil and Process Industries can provide supply chain case studies. They are also 
	available for the use/charging for copyright material    (2KNC)
	MichaelUschold: Agree with Nicola - on need to align requirements for ontologies with the kinds of 
	ontologies needed.    (2KND)
	PeterYim: I want to endorse the earlier posts from ToddSchneider 
	(http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/2010-12/msg00032.html) and AliHashemi 
	(http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/2010-12/msg00091.html) and want want to draw people 
	attention to them, and to make sure the organizing committee give them due consideration when 
	crafting the approach and tracks    (2KNE)
	MikeBennett: On government, it's worth noting that in the US the regulators are starting to ask 
	questions with the word "Ontology" in them, in terms of compliance to Dood/Frank    (2KNF)
	MikeDenny: I am part of a team implementing net-centric enterprise information exchange across the 
	US Air Force that is semantically informed by formal domain vocabularies built by Communities of 
	Interest. I would be interested in joining with others in this forum who would like to establish 
	some activity at the Ontology Summit that attempts to illuminate the tangible and less tangible 
	benefits of ontology for data modeling and Web service development within the enterprise.    (2KNG)
	MatthewWest: @MikeDenny - If I make the Summit I would be interested in that.    (2KNH)
	GaryBergCross: The Marine Metadata Interoperability Project has some demo success stories to report 
	(http://marinemetadata.org/)on coastal and marine data.    (2KNI)
	MichaelUschold: The Marine Metadata Interoperability link is not working.    (2KNJ)
	GaryBergCross: For MMI (Marine Metadata Interoperability) try http://marinemetadata.org/node    (2KNK)
	DeborahMacPherson: I've just reached out to some people working on the International Framework for 
	Dictionaries, which is a framework for the building industry where different ontologies can 
	co-exist.  most 
	people are in Europe but seeing if they can get engaged in the discussion or possibly come join the 
	workshop.    (2KNL)
	RamSriram: @Deborah - Regarding the IFD library: Are these ontologies actually being used in the 
	industry?    (2KNM)
	DeborahMacPherson: RE: IFD Library - yes and no - not being used by architects and engineers enough, 
	is used by data warehouses and software developers. End users just keep making up their own 
	definitions for what things are and how they are related    (2KNN)
	NicolaGuarino: @John: [responding to his verbal remarks] Yes, interoperability requirements depend 
	on who you are interoperating with, but in many cases you don't know your partner in advance...    (2KNO)
	MichaelUschold: Agree with John, elaborating on Nicola's point. Nicola is right in general, that an 
	ontology for interoperability will typicaly need more depth than one for search. John shows how we 
	need to dig a bit deeper to get the full picture.    (2KNP)
	MichaelUschold: I'm here, I will try to do that    (2KNQ)
	PeterYim: == Candidate Track Inputs now ==    (2KNR)
	PeterYim: Please supply submit via the chat-board, candidate "Tracks" - title (no more than 5 
	words); if possible, along with a brief description (no more than 30 words)    (2KNS)
	MichaelUschold: 1.Ontology Application Framework 2.Analysis of Case Studies 3.Roles/Uses of 
	Ontologies 4.Industry sectors for ontology applications 5.Value metrics    (2KNT)
	MikeBennett: Track: Ontology as application v ontology for domain knowledge    (2KNU)
	RexBrooks: Value-Models: What values are appropriate arguments for domains--I don't really have the 
	time to champion this, but I would work with a champion.    (2KNV)
	RalphHodgson: @MikeBennett - Ontologies as specification models - see slide 22 of the scribd 
	presentation also other slides at the back    (2KNW)
	MichaelUschold: To MikeBennett - this is covered in the roles/uses of ontologies. One use is a basis 
	for an application, another use is to keep a record of a body of knowledge.    (2KNX)
	MikeBennett: @MichaelUschold - agreed    (2KNY)
	NicolaGuarino: 1. Ontologies of (for) socio-technical systems; 2. deep vs. lightweight ontologies    (2KNZ)
	MichaelUschold: How do you get a formal reference to a persons as in @MIkeBennet, is it just to type 
	it in?    (2KO0)
	RexBrooks: @MichaelUschold: Value Metrics would be part of Value Models.    (2KO1)
	RalphHodgson: Ontology Architecture as a theme    (2KO2)
	GaryBergCross: Perhaps the overall structure for the workshop is to have a track for some general 
	discussion that is followed by more specific topical tracks that fit within the App framework set up 
	in the general track. This would be followed by a panel discussion.    (2KO3)
	RalphHodgson: QA Metrics for Ontologies - as part of Ontology Engineering theme    (2KO4)
	DeborahMacPherson: Propose a Track for using ontologies to link up disparate domains. For example, 
	15926 from it's history to future - process plants before, buildings and energy now. - another 
	option is getting from relational databases to web services, SOA and more familiar terms.    (2KO5)
	RexBrooks: By Value Models I mean things like Values for good/workable/useful ontologies as one, 
	while the value of a interoperability ontology to emergency management would be another.    (2KO6)
	GaryBergCross: I'm surprised that no one (on this call) has volunteered (or volunteered others) to 
	cover Success Stories for Ontologies and Data Integration in the Biomedical domain. See for example: 
	http://www.lhncbc.nlm.nih.gov/lhc/docs/published/2008/pub2008024.pdf which also covers "Challenging 
	Issues"    (2KO7)
	PeterYim: given the earlier partnership MichaelUschold-MichaelGruninger work, I nominate them as 
	co-chairs or one of the track co-champions (on a track of their choice)    (2KO8)
	PeterYim: @MikeUschold - could you take one on? with Gruninger? ... if so, which one (of the 5 you 
	proposed) would be your favorite?    (2KO9)
	MichaelUschold: I'll have to ponder this. It will be certainly easier for me to lead the effort that 
	is based on my work.    (2KOA)
	NicolaGuarino: @Peter: I definitely support your proposal. However, we are just collecting 
	volunteers for tracks (and tracks proposals) now. Co-chairs will be appointed later...    (2KOB)
	PeterYim: @Nicola - yes ... however, I just wanted to make sure MikeUschold doesn't "hate" me for 
	volunteering him here!    (2KOC)
	GaryBergCross: For a track can we get someone to discuss Ontology Design Patterns (ODPs) as a Best 
	practice? The recent 2nd Workshop on Ontology Patterns probably had some success examples of their 
	use.    (2KOD)
	SteveRay: MillsDavis suggests Dennis Wisnosky (DoD) as a speaker    (2KOE)
	RamSriram: There are a number of good applications of biomedical ontologies reported by by NCBO 
	(http://www.bioontology.org/). I think most of these applications are in research organizations.    (2KOF)
	GaryBergCross: I for one think success in research organizations is good to have at the Summit. They 
	can often be the leading edge for later commercial work.    (2KOG)
	MichaelUschold: @Ralph [referring to his verbal remarks] - this is hotly contested. Some say 
	ontologies are not needed for linked data. Indeed, if you look at they BBC example, you don't see 
	much talk about how an ontology was used or if so, how it helped.    (2KOH)
	RalphHodgson: @MichaelUschold - is the "this" of your remark referring to how schema-based LOD is?    (2KOI)
	MichaelUschold: @Ralph - yes, sorry for not being clear.    (2KOJ)
	GaryBergCross: Does FOIS 2010 have anything to suggest on a track?    (2KOK)
	MichaelUschold: There is another track, it might be called a marketing/presentation track that 
	focused on how to get the message out to the public. All other groups would feed in to this one.    (2KOL)
	GaryBergCross: I like the idea of at least a talk on the ontology "marketing" idea - towards the end 
	of the workshop..    (2KOM)
	MichaelUschold: When people talk about speakers, when and where will they speak? At upcoming 
	telecons? At the summit? Im unclear.    (2KON)
	PeterYim: yes ... mainly at virtual panel sessions    (2KOO)
	MichaelUschold: @Peter - ok, thanks.    (2KOP)
	PavithraKenjige: thanks for inviting    (2KOQ)
	LeoObrst: I use a slide for educational purposes that plots the expressivity of an ontology (really, 
	semantic models, ranging from taxonomy to thesaurus to conceptual model to logical theory, 
	underscoring that "more expressive semantic models enable more complex applications", with 
	applications ranging from simple search extensions to enhanced search/navigation and 
	cross-referencing of documents, to enterprise modeling and question anwering, to semantic search and 
	interoperability applications.    (2KOR)
	PeterYim: -- session ended: 13:10 pm PST --    (2KOS)
 - end of in-session chat-transcript -    (2K64)

Audio Recording of this Session    (2K69)

For the record ...    (2K6I)

How To Join (while the session is in progress)    (2K6J)