OntologySummit2014 session-08 Track-A: Common Reusable Semantic Content-II - Thu 2014-03-06    (4860)

Panelists / Briefings:    (4865)

Archives:    (4869)

Abstract    (486L)

Experiences in Knowledge Sharing: Lessons from research and experience in Big Data, Linked Data and Semantic Web Applications ... intro slides    (486M)

This is our 9th OntologySummit, a joint initiative by Ontolog, NIST, NCOR, NCBO, IAOA & NCO_NITRD with the support of our co-sponsors.    (486N)

Since the beginnings of the Semantic Web, ontologies have played key roles in the design and deployment of new semantic technologies. Yet over the years, the level of collaboration between the Semantic Web and Applied Ontology communities has been much less than expected. Within Big Data applications, ontologies appear to have had little impact.    (486O)

This year's Ontology Summit is an opportunity for building bridges between the Semantic Web, Linked Data, Big Data, and Applied Ontology communities. On the one hand, the Semantic Web, Linked Data, and Big Data communities can bring a wide array of real problems (such as performance and scalability challenges and the variety problem in Big Data) and technologies (automated reasoning tools) that can make use of ontologies. On the other hand, the Applied Ontology community can bring a large body of common reusable content (ontologies) and ontological analysis techniques. Identifying and overcoming ontology engineering bottlenecks is critical for all communities.    (486P)

OntologySummit2014 will pose and address the primary challenges in these areas of interaction among the different communities. The Summit activities will bring together insights and methods from these different communities, synthesize new insights, and disseminate knowledge across field boundaries.    (486Q)

In this session we aim to bring together the lessons learned to date and new insights on the re-use of ontology content. We have three speakers lined up to share their perspectives on ontology re-use in the contexts of knowledge representation and sharing, linked data and semantic web reasoning applications. These presentations will be followed by an open discussion on the considerations and requirements for those wanting to identify and use semantic resources in each of these contexts, and the things to think about when developing ontologies for re-usability.    (486R)

See more details at: OntologySummit2014 (homepage for this summit)    (486S)

Briefings:    (486T)

Agenda:    (4870)

OntologySummit2014 session-08 Track-A: Common Reusable Semantic Content-II    (4871)

Session Format: this is a virtual session conducted over an augmented conference call    (4872)

Proceedings    (4877)

Please refer to the above    (4878)

IM Chat Transcript captured during the session:    (4879)

 see raw transcript here.    (487A)
 (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.    (487B)
 -- begin in-session chat-transcript --    (487C)
	Chat transcript from room: summit_20140306
	2014-03-06 GMT-08:00 [PST]
	------    (49GN)
	[8:53] PeterYim: Welcome to the    (49GO)
	 = OntologySummit2014 session-08 Track-A: Common Reusable Semantic Content-II - Thu 2014-03-06 =    (49GP)
	Summit Theme: Summit Theme: OntologySummit2014: "Big Data and Semantic Web Meet Applied Ontology"    (49GQ)
	Track-A Focus: Common Reusable Semantic Content    (49GR)
	Session Topic: Experiences in Knowledge Sharing: Lessons from research and experience in Big Data, Linked Data and Semantic Web Applications    (49GS)
	Session Co-chairs: 
	* Mr. MikeBennett (EDM Council, Hypercube)
	* Dr. GaryBergCross (SOCoP; Knowledge Strategies)
	* Ms. AndreaWesterinen (Nine Points Solutions)    (49GT)
	* Dr. JohnSowa (VivoMind Intelligence) - "Historical Perspectives: On Problems of Knowledge Sharing"
	* Professor MichelDumontier (Stanford BMIR) - "Tactical Formalization of Linked Open Data"
	* Mr. KingsleyIdehen (OpenLink Software) - "Ontology Driven Data Integration & Big Linked Open Data"    (49GU)
	* Refer to details on session page at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2014_03_06
	* (if you haven't already done so) please click on "settings" (top center) and morph from "anonymous" to your RealName; also please enable "Show timestamps" while there.
	* Mute control (phone keypad): *7 to un-mute ... *6 to mute    (49GV)
	* Attn: Skype users ... see: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2014_03_06#nid47ZK
		** you may connect to (the skypeID) "joinconference" whether or not it indicates that it is online 
		   (i.e. even if it says it is "offline," you should still be able to connect to it.)
		** if you are using skype and the connection to "joinconference" is not holding up, try using (your favorite POTS or 
		   VoIP line, etc.) either your phone, skype-out or google-voice and call the US dial-in number: +1 (206) 402-0100 
		   ... when prompted enter Conference ID: 141184#
		** Can't find Skype Dial pad?
		*** for Windows Skype users: Can't find Skype Dial pad? ... it's under the "Call" dropdown menu as "Show Dial pad"
		*** for Linux Skype users: if the dialpad button is not shown in the call window you need to press the "d" hotkey to enable it    (49GW)
		* when posting in this Chat-room, kindly observe the following ...
		** whenever a name is used, please use the full WikiWord name format (every time you don't, some volunteer will have to make an edit afterwards)
		** always provide context (like: "[ref. JaneDoe's slide#12], I think the point about context is great" ... rather than "that's great!" 
		   as the latter would mean very little in the archives.)
		** when responding to a specific individual's earlier remarks, please cite his/her full WikiWord names *and* 
		   the timestamp (in PST) of his/her post that you are responding to (e.g. "@JaneDoe [11:09] - I agree, but, ...")
		** use fully qualified url's (include http:// ) without symbols (like punctuations or parentheses, etc.) right before of after that URL    (49GX)
	Attendees (in chat-room): AlanRector, AlexShkotin, AliHashemi, AmandaVizedom, 
	AndreaWesterinen, AnneThessen, BartGajderowicz, BiplabSarker, BobbinTeegarden, BruceBray, 
	CarmenChui, ChristiKapp, ConradBeaulieu, CoryCasanave, DaliaVaranka, DennisWisnosky, DennisPierson, 
	EdBernot, FranLightsom, FrankOlken, GaryBergCross, HensonGraves, JackRing, JamesOverton, JohnSowa, 
	KenBaclawski, KingsleyIdehen, KrzysztofJanowicz, LeoObrst, LesMorgan, MarcelaVegetti, MarkLinehan, 
	MatthewLange, MatthewWest, MichaelGruninger, MichelDumontier, MikeBennett, MikeDean, NaicongLi, 
	NancyWiegand, PatrickOBrien, PeterYim, RichardMcAllister, RobertPowers, ShahanKhatchadourian, 
	SimonSpero, SundayOjo, TerryLongstreth, ToddSchneider, TorstenHahmann, UriShani, WernerKuhn    (49GY)
	 == Proceedings ==    (49GZ)
	[9:16] KingsleyIdehen: Peter ?    (49H0)
	[9:19] anonymous morphed into ConradBeaulieu    (49H1)
	[9:26] anonymous morphed into TerryLongstreth    (49H2)
	[9:17] KingsleyIdehen: Just checking the settings    (49H3)
	[9:26] PeterYim: Hi Kingsley ... hi, everyone!    (49H4)
	[9:26] MikeBennett: Hi Peter!    (49H5)
	[9:27] EdBernot: Hi Peter!    (49H6)
	[9:28] anonymous morphed into Michel    (49H7)
	[9:29] anonymous morphed into Robert Powers    (49H8)
	[9:29] AlexShkotin: Hi all!    (49H9)
	[9:30] AlexShkotin: What about Skype?    (49HA)
	[9:30] MikeBennett: Hi Alex. Skype joinconference seems to work OK here.    (49HB)
	[9:32] AlexShkotin: I got it    (49HC)
	[9:31] anonymous morphed into NaicongLi    (49HD)
	[9:32] anonymous morphed into AndreaWesterinen    (49HE)
	[9:34] anonymous morphed into CarmenChui    (49HF)
	[9:34] Robert Powers morphed into RobertPowers    (49HG)
	[9:36] KrzysztofJanowicz: Hi    (49HH)
	[9:34] GaryBergCross: Michel is on the chat.    (49HI)
	[9:36] RobertPowers: Michel, are you on the call?    (49HJ)
	[9:36] MikeBennett: Is the Michel on the chat MichelDumontier? If so please can you change it to 
	your full name and join us on the phone bridge if you're not already. Many thanks!    (49HK)
	[9:37] Michel: hi, just getting off a call    (49HL)
	[9:39] Michel morphed into MichelDumontier    (49HM)
	[9:38] MikeBennett: Great!    (49HN)
	[9:38] GaryBergCross: I sent JohnSowa an email to see if he is joining us..    (49HO)
	[9:39] MatthewLange: Is the vnc server up?    (49HP)
	[9:40] MikeBennett: Yes the VNC server is up    (49HQ)
	[9:40] MichelDumontier: have joined the call    (49HR)
	[9:46] GaryBergCross: No answer from the tele #s I have for JohnSowa...so still puzzled.    (49HS)
	[9:47] PeterYim: JohnSowa is already on the voice line    (49HT)
	[9:48] GaryBergCross: Ok Good .. didn't see him on chat.    (49HU)
	[9:48] PeterYim: we might want to (verbally) prompt him, as well as others who aren't already here, 
	to join us in the chat-room    (49HV)
	[9:52] GaryBergCross: Welcome John....    (49HW)
	[9:41] PeterYim: == MikeBennett starts the session on behalf of Session Co-chairs ... see slides 
	under: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2014_03_06#nid486D    (49HX)
	[9:41] ... anonymous morphed into LesMorgan    (49HY)
	[9:43] ... anonymous morphed into BruceBray    (49HZ)
	[9:43] ... anonymous morphed into RichardMcAllister    (49I0)
	[9:51] anonymous morphed into CoryCasanave    (49I1)
	[9:52] MatthewWest: What counts as "small set of semantic content" and what counts as "large set of 
	semantic content" on Slide 6 of the introduction?    (49I2)
	[9:55] AndreaWesterinen: @MatthewWest [9:52] "Small" means a design pattern with a few classes and 
	relationships. "Large" could be a complete domain or upper ontology or schema.    (49I3)
	[9:56] SimonSpero: @MatthewWest [9:52] : small == can be visualized on an A0 poster : large = (not small)?    (49I4)
	[9:52] GaryBergCross: Welcome John....    (49I5)
	[9:56] PeterYim: == JohnSowa presenting ...    (49I6)
	[9:56] ... anonymous morphed into BobbinTeegarden    (49I7)
	[10:01] GaryBergCross: Lack of Semantic app software not well integrated with mainstream IT is a 
	major problem as shown on slide 5.    (49I8)
	[10:03] AnneThessen: I completely agree with JohnSowa slide 6 ["We need better tools, interfaces, 
	and methodologies ..."]    (49I9)
	[10:04] GaryBergCross: This is a topic for the Tool track to address.    (49IA)
	[10:03] MikeBennett: ... slide 8    (49IB)
	[10:04] MikeBennett: ... slide 9    (49IC)
	[10:04] MikeBennett: John please call out the slide numbers    (49ID)
	[10:05] PeterYim: @MikeBennett ... please try to prompt JohnSowa verbally    (49IE)
	[10:09] PeterYim: ... on slide#14 now    (49IF)
	[10:13] PeterYim: ... on slide#16 now    (49IG)
	[10:13] AmandaVizedom: Question for @JohnSowa (we are on slide 11, but q applies to this whole range 
	of slides): In my experience, being familiar with the history of logic & these fundamentals is 
	useful in making ontology design/architecture decisions, in recognizing the logical equivalence (or 
	non-) of different representation approaches, and in recognizing certain ontology anti-patterns that 
	correspond to classic logical errors. However, they are no where near enough to ground reusable 
	ontology development. How do you think that understanding these logical representations and patterns 
	is helpful to overcoming obstacles to reuse?    (49IH)
	[10:16] AlexShkotin: @AmandaVizedom, we should not repeat their errors;-)    (49II)
	[10:19] GaryBergCross: @AmandaVizedom Great question for John. I hope we get to it in discussion.    (49IJ)
	[10:14] PeterYim: ... on slide#17 now    (49IK)
	[10:18] ... anonymous morphed into PatrickOBrien    (49IL)
	[10:18] PeterYim: ... on slide#19 now    (49IM)
	[10:18] AliHashemi: ... (i believe it's slide 21)    (49IN)
	[10:19] PeterYim: ... on slide#22 now    (49IO)
	[10:20] AlexShkotin / MikeBennett: ... slide 24    (49IP)
	[10:20] GaryBergCross: John is getting at problems of reusing some well know resources like WordNet.    (49IQ)
	[10:21] PeterYim: ... on slide#28 now [10:21] GaryBergCross: [ ref. slide#29: "Enable subject-matter 
	experts to review, update, and extend their knowledge bases with little or no assistance from IT 
	specialists" ] Uh oh.. getting rid of the KE means unemployment for some of us...    (49IR)
	[10:22] CoryCasanave: Many (most?) domain experts have no notation, what is the notation of law enforcement?    (49IS)
	[10:22] SimonSpero: @CoryCasanave: UCR (Uniform Crime Reporting)    (49IT)
	[10:23] SimonSpero: @CoryCasanave: 10-codes    (49IU)
	[10:24] CoryCasanave: @Simon, they do have domain vocabularies - but most lack ways to express them 
	other than text and spreadsheets    (49IV)
	[10:26] MikeBennett: @CoryCasanave [10:22] if you walk into any conference room there are whiteboard 
	diagrams with boxes and lines. So presenting subject matter in edges and lines, with textual 
	annotation, should be a relatively universal SME format.    (49IW)
	[10:30] CoryCasanave: @MikeBennett, some people respond to ad-hoc boxes and lines, some don't. Fewer 
	respond to boxes and lines with any semantic consistency [10:31] MikeBennett: @CoryCasanave very 
	true - in any group there are those whose primary modality is visual, and those whose is verbal. 
	Need spreadsheets / tables / wiki pages for the latter. THe same content needs to be expressable in 
	both.    (49IX)
	[10:36] JohnSowa: @MikeBennett, I strongly support spreadsheets. That's another example of a 
	modality that requires almost zero learning to start using effectively.    (49IY)
	[10:38] MikeBennett: @JohnSowa I've seen some very complex SME spreadsheets - but it's their 
	complexity not ours. I think there's potential in a spreadsheet structure that reflects classes, 
	properties (with real-world names on the columns, not OWL terms)    (49IZ)
	[10:41] JohnSowa: @MikeBennett (and continuation of note to @DennisWisnosky), then I would derive as 
	much of the knowledge as possible from available data of any kind -- structured and unstructured. 
	The primary role of the SME would be to answer questions to help the automated tools work better.    (49J0)
	[10:24] DennisWisnosky: Why documents feeding the NL Tools. Why not some SIRI?    (49J1)
	[10:30] JohnSowa: @DennisWisnosky, I mentioned documents because the bulk of the knowledge is in 
	documents. But I would certainly recommend SIRI or similar voice-based tools as an option -- 
	especially for hands-free use by the SMEs.    (49J2)
	[10:24] AmandaVizedom: About @JohnSowa's slide 20: I would (do, have done) argue that the quest for 
	a complete ontology has been an significant hindrance to the development of reusable ontologies. 
	Even if it were a complete ontology, to incorporate all of the contextual variation and dependencies 
	observed in reality, it would be unusable. It would be at least as unusable as a life-sized map. 
	Ontologies, like scientific models, need to be circumscribed in order to be usable. But that doesn't 
	mean we can't have reuse. IMHO, it does mean we have to do better at making the boundaries and 
	emphasis of our ontologies clear and detectable.    (49J3)
	[10:27] JohnSowa: @Amanda, short answer: what we can learn from history is the requirement that 
	tools must be designed for the SMEs to use without additional training. We still need KEs, but not 
	in the middle between the SME and the system. There is much more to say, but that's another topic.    (49J4)
	[10:30] ToddSchneider: @JohnSowa, in your assertion that 'systems have been inter-operating for ...' 
	many years leaves out the process to get them to inter-operate. The ability to get information (and 
	other) systems to inter-operate in a timely and cost effective manner is still a challenge.    (49J5)
	[10:34] JohnSowa: @ToddSchneider, I agree. Semantics has helped us develop better systems. But more 
	people would use more and better semantics if the learning curve were less steep.    (49J6)
	[10:40] ToddSchneider: @JohnSowa, I agree. If engineers had more training in logic and ontological 
	analysis would help in this regard. However, somethings are difficult to understand (e.g., Saharon 
	Shelah's book on Classification Theory, Quantum Field Theory). Of course this puts the onus on us to 
	help create tools that aid the general user to better apply the techniques of ontology when creating 
	information.    (49J7)
	[10:35] DennisWisnosky: @JohnSowa - you don't discuss the bias of the SME's and the bias of the 
	Knowledge person to bias the KB = ontology. I believe that just as in other domains - e.g. 
	manufacturing the only way truth will will-out is to eliminate the human.    (49J8)
	[10:38] JohnSowa: Dennis, I didn't even have time to mention all my slides. If by "eliminating the 
	human" you mean that as much as possible of the knowledge be derived from available resources (Big 
	Data),    (49J9)
	[10:43] DennisWisnosky: @JohnSowa - Yes, just saw your last sting and I agree. In addition, first I 
	am buying totally that a NL processor takes the place of the knowledge worker = the ontologist, 
	maybe. Secondly, I am saying that over time we can build rules into the NL processor that based upon 
	the natural laws that you mentioned, as well as the context, etc. throws away that which does not 
	make sense. This may happen in real time, or analyzing what the data store as it is amassed.    (49JA)
	[10:46] AndreaWesterinen: @DennisWisnosky [10:43] NL processing really only works if it understands 
	the language of the domain of the SME. This is not generic. At this point in time, getting the 
	domain concepts right could be partially automated but definitely needs cleanup and iteration by 
	SMEs.    (49JB)
	[10:47] JohnSowa: I am not advocating full NL understanding. But current tools can derive enough 
	from documents (or speech) to formulate intelligent questions when they need help.    (49JC)
	[10:48] AndreaWesterinen: @JohnSowa [10:47] That has not been my experience - unless you have 
	knowledge of the domain and its language.    (49JD)
	[10:48] JohnSowa: @AndreaWesterinen For examples of the way systems can learn by reading, see 
	http://www.jfsowa.com/talks/goal7.pdf [10:45] JohnSowa: @ToddSchneider and @DennisWisnosky, I 
	believe that highly trained experts already know the best way to talk about their field. They should 
	not have to learn any conventions that we want them to use.    (49JE)
	[11:08] ToddSchneider: @JohnSowa, "highly trained experts already know the best way to talk about 
	their field", but only within their field. If there's a need to communicate outside their field 
	(i.e. inter-operate), then there's a problem. [11:17] JohnSowa: @ToddSchneider, I agree that many 
	experts don't communicate effectively with people in other fields. But the problem for anybody, 
	expert or not, to communicate effectively with computers is many orders of magnitude more difficult.    (49JF)
	[11:16] GaryBergCross: @JohnSowa would you have an issues with the value of formalizing small 
	schemas the way Michel did for the relation between drug disease pathway and gene?    (49JG)
	[10:23] PeterYim: == MichelDumontier presenting ...    (49JH)
	[10:31] AmandaVizedom: @MichelDumontier, very glad to have presentation that starts from deep 
	awareness of how much is out there (as in LOV) and moves through experiences with trying to reuse 
	it. Thanks for contributing this.    (49JI)
	[10:50] MichelDumontier: @AmandaVizedom thanks for your comment :)    (49JJ)
	[10:54] AmandaVizedom: @MichelDumontier, You're welcome. Many are confronting such tactical issues 
	now, I think. Folks increasingly start with a plan to reuse, but find it nowhere near as simple as 
	they expected. Gory details of how people manage reuse successfully are valuable!    (49JK)
	[10:42] AmandaVizedom: Something going unstated here wrt this discussion of tools for KE / ontology 
	development and the question of reusable content / reuse of content. I'm not saying that they are 
	unrelated, only that the conversation just above (multiple participants) seems to be taking as 
	obvious what the connection is. Are any of you willing & able to spell that out?    (49JL)
	[10:48] GaryBergCross: @MichelDumontier Very nice perspective on a tactical approach to 
	formalization for specific reuse.    (49JM)
        [10:51] MichelDumontier: @Gary Thanks!    (49LV)
	[10:49] PeterYim: @MichelDumontier - for what you are trying to achieve, does limitations of 
	expressivity of the ontology language (OWL in your case) come into the picture    (49JN)
	[10:52] MichelDumontier: @PeterYim so far we have been quite happy with OWL for consistency checking 
	(OWL-DL profile) and query answering (OWL-EL profile)    (49JO)
	[10:54] MichelDumontier: @PeterYim As we look towards more *accurate* representations of source 
	knowledge, however, may require something else    (49JP)
	[10:55] PeterYim: @MichelDumontier, thanks ... what are the "something else" being considered now?    (49JQ)
	[10:57] PeterYim: Thank you, @MichelDumontier    (49JR)
	[10:57] MichelDumontier: @PeterYim probabilistic reasoning (from aggregation and evidence type), 
	non-monotonic reasoning (for inconsistent kbs)    (49JS)
	[10:55] GaryBergCross: @MichelDumontier Is the OntoFunc Tool something that might be easily used by 
	interested parties for finding relations between object and ontology categories in areas other than 
	Biomedicine?    (49JT)
	[10:57] MichelDumontier: @GaryBergCross yes. can be used with any terminology. 
	https://code.google.com/p/ontofunc/    (49JU)
	[10:56] RobertPowers: @MichelDumontier Could category theory/ologs be an answer to the problem of 
	representation you show in slide 11?    (49JV)
	[11:01] MichelDumontier: @RobertPowers two factors - initial RDF was minimal (model 1) because 
	triple stores didn't scale, and different datasets do not necessarily collect all the data that 
	another similar type dataset does. we need a general model for entity-attribute-value pertaining to 
	measurements to define standard representations. e.g. 
	https://code.google.com/p/semanticscience/wiki/ODPMeasurements and 
	http://www.jbiomedsem.com/content/5/1/14/abstract    (49JW)
	[11:04] RobertPowers: @MichelDumontier Yes, thx Michel!    (49JX)
	[11:03] SimonSpero: @MichelDumontier OASIS Quantities and Units of Measure Ontology Standard 
	(QUOMOS) TC https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=quomos    (49JY)
	[11:06] AndreaWesterinen: @MichelDumontier There is also Quantities, Units, Dimensions and Data 
	Types Ontologies (QUDT) ... http://www.qudt.org/    (49JZ)
	[11:22] MichelDumontier: @AndreaWesterinen @SimonSpero - indeed there are now many standards! but 
	now what?    (49K0)
	[10:50] PeterYim: == KingsleyIdehen presenting ...    (49K1)
	[10:49] MatthewWest: ... *7 to unmute    (49K2)
	[10:49] KingsleyIdehen: ... Yes    (49K3)
	[10:50] MatthewWest: ... @Mike - we could hear you.    (49K4)
	[10:50] MikeBennett: ... Thanks @Matthew, I thought I had gone missing for a bit :)    (49K5)
	[10:49] KingsleyIdehen: All: http://kidehen.blogspot.com/2014/02/class-equivalence-based-reasoning.html 
	-- example that includes live examples in regards to my session re. ontology driven integration of 
	disparate data, across the burgeoning LInked Open Data (LOD) Cloud. A related presentation, in 
	regards to understanding what data actually is: http://slidesha.re/1epEyZ1 
	Glossary of terms: http://bit.ly/1cchBvV .    (49K6)
	[10:57] PeterYim: ... on slide#7 now    (49K7)
	[11:00] GaryBergCross: @KingsleyIdehen Thanks for framing this practical issue of the dilemma for 
	LOD folks finding a starting point.    (49K8)
	[11:02] GaryBergCross: @KingsleyIdehen Some of us start not with a formal ontology or LOD vocabulary 
	but with a "conceptual model" of the domain under consideration.    (49K9)
	[11:04] MatthewWest: ... Apologies, I have to leave.    (49KA)
	[11:05] PeterYim: ... bye, MatthewWest    (49KB)
	[11:06] KingsleyIdehen: http://kidehen.blogspot.com/2014/02/class-equivalence-based-reasoning.html    (49KC)
	[11:07] TerryLongstreth: @KingsleyIdehen thesis reminds me of a Turing award lecture by Ken Iverson 
	:"Notation as a tool of thought", where he argued that the result of a mental process is invfluenced 
	by the medium and means used. Computer Science also went through a period when the most important 
	buzzword was 'design language' which was distinct from but mappable to an implementation method.    (49KD)
	[11:15] AndreaWesterinen: @TerryLongstreth [11:07] This also is covered in Gerald Weinberg's 
	Introduction to General Systems Thinking" - in his Laws of Difference and Indifference.    (49KE)
	[11:09] MikeBennett: @TerryLongstreth that sounds like the Saphir-Whorff hypothesis in spoken 
	language.    (49KF)
	[11:20] TerryLongstreth: @MikeBennett - you're probably right, but I think what Iverson was really 
	talking about was how he used APL as a logical notation beyond programming.    (49KG)
	[11:14] AmandaVizedom: @KingsleyIdehen - slides 12-13 are a great example of how some reasoning *is* 
	a key part of making Linked Data effective. Granted, subsumption reasoning is the least disputed, 
	but it gives a nice, salient example of how even small increments of reasoning and 
	ontology/vocabulary mapping greatly amplify the power of linked data.    (49KH)
	[11:17] AndreaWesterinen: @KingsleyIdehen, slide 17 - separating the rules from the concepts, and 
	allowing individual reuse of both, is one of the "summary" points from the Track A emails. Thanks!    (49KI)
	[11:18] KingsleyIdehen: @SimonSpero: no [11:19] KingsleyIdehen: @SimonSpero: it has to be  
	:ClassX owl:equivalentClass :ClassY as the basis for such inference    (49KJ)
	[11:18] PeterYim: @KingsleyIdehen, great talk ... btw, I think the url's on your (pdf version) slide 
	deck are not active ... can you supply an updated version, so I can swap in, please 
	... [slides updated; links are active now =ppy/2014.03.07-10:53 PST]    (49KK)
	[11:19] KingsleyIdehen: http://kidehen.blogspot.com/2014/02/class-equivalence-based-reasoning.html 
	... all links are accessible from this page    (49KL)
	[11:21] KingsleyIdehen: [1] http://lod.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fxmlns.com%2Ffoaf%2F0.1%2FOrganization&graph=http%3A%2F%2Fdata.reegle.info%2F&graph=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.openlinksw.com%2Fdata%2Fturtle%2Fontology_mappings%2Fschemas_mappings%2FSchemaOrgToOpenLink.ttl
        -- foaf:Organization description    (49KM)
	[11:22] KingsleyIdehen: [2] http://lod.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fschema.org%2FOrganization&graph=http%3A%2F%2Fdata.reegle.info%2F&graph=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.openlinksw.com%2Fdata%2Fturtle%2Fontology_mappings%2Fschemas_mappings%2FSchemaOrgToOpenLink.ttl 
        -- schemaorg:Organization    (49KN)
	[11:18] SimonSpero: @KingsleyIdehen does ":a owl:sameAs foaf:Organization" (virtuso: entail) :a owl:equivalentClass foaf:Organization"    (49KO)
	[11:20] KingsleyIdehen: [1] description of foaf:Organization *without inference and reasoning enabled*, 
	so the relations presented are specific to the aforementioned class.    (49KP)
	[11:21] KingsleyIdehen: [2] description of schema.org:Organization *without inference and reasoning enabled*, 
	so the relations presented are specific to the aforementioned class .    (49KQ)
	[11:21] SimonSpero: @KingsleyIdehen: thanks - it's OWL-Full licensed but not OWL-DL    (49KR)
	[11:18] MichelDumontier: ... unavailable for talking at the moment. please post questions.    (49KS)
	[11:20] AlexShkotin: ... It's too late in Moscow:-) Bye, All.    (49KT)
	[11:20] MichelDumontier: ... back.    (49KU)
	[11:20] PeterYim: == Q & A and Open Discussion ...    (49KV)
	[11:23] CoryCasanave: Perhaps the speakers could address context and what statements are valid in 
	what situations. Also, for RDF, how do we encode context.    (49KW)
	[11:23] KingsleyIdehen: Here are the links with the effect of inference rules:    (49KX)
	[11:23] KingsleyIdehen: http://lod.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fschema.org%2FOrganization&inf=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.openlinksw.com%2Fschemas%2Frdfs&graph=http%3A%2F%2Fdata.reegle.info%2F&graph=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.openlinksw.com%2Fdata%2Fturtle%2Fontology_mappings%2Fschemas_mappings%2FSchemaOrgToOpenLink.ttl 
	-- schemaorg:Organization (with instances of foaf:Organization) displayed in the query solution    (49KY)
	[11:24] KingsleyIdehen: http://lod.openlinksw.com/describe/?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fpurl.org%2Fgoodrelations%2Fv1%23Offering&inf=urn%3Aschema%3Aopenlink%3Agr%3Amapping%3Arules&graph=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.foodnetworkstore.com%2F&graph=http%3A%2F%2Fpurl.org%2Fgoodrelations%2Fv1.owl 
	-- schemaorg:Offers description with instances of goodrelations:Offers (since inference rules are enabled)    (49KZ)
	[11:26] KingsleyIdehen: [re. AmandaVizedom's verbal question] I don't mind answering this question    (49L0)
	[11:33] MikeBennett: The problem with Facebook "Like" is that it doesn't really mean "Like" (re 
	Kingsley's description of FB Like in LOD)    (49L1)
	[11:34] SimonSpero: http://attempto.ifi.uzh.ch/acewiki/    (49L2)
	[11:35] SimonSpero: [a data wiki type tool]    (49L3)
	[11:35] TerryLongstreth: I think Facebook's ubiquity has meant the new meaning of Like is now 
	authoritative, particularly for non-English speakers    (49L4)
	[11:35] SimonSpero: [in ref to @KingsleyIdehen's points]    (49L5)
	[11:35] KingsleyIdehen: Tooling    (49L6)
	[11:33] MikeBennett: ... @Peter are we Ok to continue another 5 mins?    (49L7)
	[11:35] PeterYim: ... @MikeBennett, sure, by all mean (we started about 10 min. late)    (49L8)
	[11:37] MikeBennett: ... Thanks @Peter. We'll aim to wrap up at nn:40    (49L9)
	[11:37] PeterYim: ... great, Mike!    (49LA)
	[11:38] ... anonymous morphed into SundayOjo    (49LB)
	[11:39] AmandaVizedom: +1 for have a context in which, "when we want to make some information 
	contribution, we can see what the impact of that would be" (--@MichelDumontier) and to having 
	something like the Linked Data Wiki that @KingsleyIdehen described, so we can see what exists and 
	how things are connected, at a granular (not whole ontology) level. [11:39] KingsleyIdehen: The 
	:likes relation describe via OpenCyc, but part of the LOD cloud: http://bit.ly/YgLgtk    (49LC)
	[11:39] SimonSpero: Data citation support is an important need for research scientists    (49LD)
	[11:40] SimonSpero: so they can get tenure XP    (49LE)
	[11:40] MichelDumontier: Force11 - http://www.force11.org/datacitation    (49LF)
	[11:49] SimonSpero: @MichelDumontier force11 efforts were the ones I was thinking of; the details 
	are a work in progress, but they are making progress    (49LG)
	[11:40] KingsleyIdehen: http://lod.openlinksw.com/c/G34LSH7 -- OpenCyc Likes & Dislikes    (49LH)
	[11:41] MikeBennett: Facebook "Like" means "I wish to follow this conversation" and has no 
	commonality with sentiment    (49LI)
	[11:42] PeterYim: @ALL: if you are not subscribed to the [ontology-summit] mailing list yet, please 
	do so (and participate in the ongoing asynchronous discourse) - 
	http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit (or drop me a line - peter.yim [at] cim3.com)    (49LJ)
	[11:43] PeterYim: @ALL: as announced by our Symposium co-chairs, Professor TimFinin and Dr. Ram 
	Sriram yesterday, our Apr 28~29 Symposium (at NSF in Greater Washington DC) is now open for 
	registration. Please register yourself ASAP, as capacity is limited - see: 
	http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014/WorkshopRegistration    (49LK)
	[11:44] PeterYim: @ALL: Please mark you calendars and reserve this time, every Thursday, for the 
	OntologySummit2014 virtual panel session series. In particular ... Session-09 will be up next 
	Thursday - Thu 2014.03.13 - OntologySummit2014: "Track B: Making use of Ontologies: Tools, Services, 
	and Techniques - II" *** Please pay special attention to the start-time (9:30am PDT), as this week 
	is among the tricky ones, when N.America is in Summer time, Europe is still in Winter time, and lots 
	of other regions don't do daylight saving time at all! *** - see developing details at: 
	http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2014_03_13 ... the start-time fopr various 
	time-zones will be clearly posted there    (49LL)
	[11:44] PeterYim: @org-comm members, Reminder to those in the organizing committee, our 8th meeting 
	coming up tomorrow - Fri 2014.03.07 - see: 
	http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014/GettingOrganized#nid47MT    (49LM)
	[11:44] PeterYim: Great session ... thank you ALL!    (49LN)
	[11:44] MichelDumontier: Thanks!    (49LO)
	[11:45] KingsleyIdehen: Bye    (49LP)
	[11:45] Gary Berg-Cross: Thanks all    (49LQ)
	[11:45] MarcelaVegetti: Bye    (49LR)
	[11:45] AndreaWesterinen: Great talks! Thanks!    (49LS)
	[11:46] MikeBennett: Great insights across the whole spectrum of ontology re-use there, I look 
	forward to getting this synthesized into our Track A synthesis, and please continue to chip in via 
	the email and the track community input page.    (49LT)
	[11:45] PeterYim: -- session ended: 11:42 am PST --    (49LU)
 -- end of in-session chat-transcript --    (487D)

Additional Resources:    (487K)

For the record ...    (487S)

How To Join (while the session is in progress)    (487T)

Conference Call Details    (47ZB)

Attendees    (4808)