OntologySummit2014: Review and Follow-up Action Planning ("postmortem") Session - Thu 2014-05-15    (4D8V)

Agenda / Briefings:    (4DEI)

Archives:    (4DEP)

Abstract:    (4DEZ)

OntologySummit2014: ("postmortem") Review and Follow-up Action Planning Session - slides    (4DF0)

With the adjournment of the OntologySummit2014_Symposium (on 29-Apr-2014) we have completed the program of this year's OntologySummit. This has been our 9th Ontology Summit, that featured a host of events spanning four months, and jointly organized by Ontolog, NIST, NCOR, NCBO, IAOA & NCO_NITRD, with the championship from our organizing committee members and support of our co-sponsors. The theme adopted for this Ontology Summit was: "Big Data and Semantic Web Meet Applied Ontology."    (4DF1)

The event today is our virtual postmortem session. We will be expecting participants of this year's summit, especially members of the organizing team, as well as anyone interested in the process or content of past and future Ontology Summits, at this session.    (4DF2)

The goal of this session is to revisit the Ontology Summit that just finished, and to plan ahead for the future. We will discuss what worked and what can be improved during the 4 months of OntologySummit2014 (plus the preparation work that led up to it,) and get ideas on how to make next year's Ontology Summit even better. This meeting gives us an opportunity to develop some plans and initiatives for action that will move what we have achieved beyond the 4-month Summit itself. Further, this meeting also provides an initial opportunity to suggest topics and themes for our next OntologySummit.    (4DF3)

See also: OntologySummit (home page for the summit series) and document your thoughts at: OntologySummit/Suggestions    (4DF4)

Agenda Ideas:    (4DF5)

Agenda:    (4DFF)

Ontology Summit 2014 - Postmortem Session    (4DFG)

Proceedings:    (4DFW)

Please refer to the above    (4DFX)

IM Chat Transcript captured during the session    (4DFY)

 see raw transcript here.    (4DFZ)
 (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.    (4DG0)
 -- begin in-session chat-transcript --    (4DG1)
	Chat transcript from room: summit_20140515
	2014-05-15 GMT-08:00 [PDT]
	------    (4DJA)
	[8:51] PeterYim: Welcome to the    (4DJB)
	 = OntologySummit2014: Review and Follow-up Action Planning ("postmortem") Session - Thu 2014-05-15 =    (4DJC)
	Summit Theme: OntologySummit2014: "Big Data and Semantic Web Meet Applied Ontology"    (4DJD)
	Session Topic: "Postmortem" - Review and Follow-up Action Planning Session    (4DJE)
	Session Co-chairs: Professor MichaelGruninger and Dr. LeoObrst    (4DJF)
	AGENDA:    (4DJG)
	1. Summary and Reflections on OntologySummit2014 - General Co-chairs: MichaelGruninger & LeoObrst    (4DJH)
	2. Summary and Reflections on the OntologySummit2014_Symposium - Sumposium co-chairs: RamSriram & TimFinin    (4DJI)
	3. OntologySummit2014 and OntologySummit(s) in Numbers & Charts  - PeterYim & AmandaVizedom    (4DJJ)
	4. Open Discussion-I: postmortem and follow-ups for OntologySummit2014 - All    (4DJK)
	5. Open Discussion-II: Ideas and suggestion for our next OntologySummit - All    (4DJL)
	6. AOB / Actions Items / Wrap-up - session co-chairs: LeoObrst & MichaelGruninger    (4DJM)
	Logistics:    (4DJN)
	* Refer to details on session page at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2014_05_15    (4DJO)
	* (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.    (4DJP)
	* Mute control (phone keypad): *7 to un-mute ... *6 to mute    (4DJQ)
	* Attn: Skype users ... see: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2014_05_15#nid4DD0
	** 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    (4DJR)
	* 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    (4DJS)
	Attendees: AlanRector, AmandaVizedom, AndreaWesterinen, BethDiGiulian, BrandNiemann, CarolBean, 
	ChristophLange, EdBernot, FrancescaQuattri, HensonGraves, LeoObrst, MarcelaVegetti, MatthewWest, 
	MichaelGruninger, MikeBennett, MikeDean, NaicongLi, PeterYim, RamSriram, RokanFaruqui, SundayOjo, 
	TerryLongstreth, TimFinin, ToddSchneider    (4DJT)
	 == Proceedings ==    (4DJU)
	[8:24] anonymous morphed into RokanFaruqui    (4DJV)
	[9:34] anonymous morphed into BrandNiemann    (4DJW)
	[9:38] RamSriram: I am here, but I guess I am muted    (4DJX)
	[9:39] LeoObrst: Ram: *7    (4DJY)
	[9:39] PeterYim: == MichaelGruninger starts session on behalf of the co-chairs ... see slides under: 
	http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2014_05_15#nid4DET    (4DJZ)
	[9:44] anonymous morphed into BethDiGiulian    (4DK0)
	[9:45] BrandNiemann: You did engage the 200_ members of the Federal Big Data Working Group Meetup: 
	http://www.meetup.com/Federal-Big-Data-Working-Group/ and I prepared input to your review and action 
	planning session today.    (4DK1)
	[9:48] BrandNiemann: You might consider becoming a Meetup: The world's largest network of local 
	groups to revitalize local community and help people around the world self-organize like MOOCs 
	(Massive Open On-line Classes) being considered by the White House. The Meetup.com collaboration 
	environment is very inexpensive.    (4DK2)
	[9:48] LeoObrst: [further to the "Chair" slides] More generally: What were the successful aspects of 
	Ontology Summit 2014? What wasn't so successful? And how should we change these for Ontology Summit 
	2015? What do we need to add?    (4DK3)
	[9:49] PeterYim: @Chairs - we have 23 on the conference bridge now, but only 19 on the chat now ... 
	(when you have a chance) please prompt those folks to join us in the chat-room    (4DK4)
	[9:51] ChristophLange: Sorry for joining late; now catching up with the chat    (4DK5)
	[9:52] anonymous morphed into CarolBean    (4DK6)
	[9:55] TerryLongstreth: MichaelGruninger slide 6: should mention topic of availability of 
	entry-level training - I believe part of the tension Michael mentions stems from lack of common 
	baselines. May need to explain dichotomy of ontology for human consumption/communication vs. machine 
	(essentially, an ontology as a computer program).    (4DK7)
	[9:56] MikeBennett: @Terry +1 it feels that most available training material assumes that whichever 
	aspect of this is of interest to the trainer, is all there is. I may be being unfair there!    (4DK8)
	[9:58] LeoObrst: @[9:55] TerryLongstreth: the IAOA SWAO SIG chairs have proposed a joint effort with 
	the IAOA Education Committee to provide a set of tutorials on ontologies, best practices for 
	ontological engineering, etc. -- and probably to be hosted on the IAOA web site, and thus be open to 
	all.    (4DK9)
	[10:02] SundayOjo: These three could be viewed as different levels of abstraction of same 
	application domain semantics.    (4DKA)
	[10:04] MikeBennett: @Sunday indeed. Or separation of concerns, framed in terms of software 
	development methodologies. One workshop I have been involved with in the past focuses on use of 
	ontologies as "Conceptual Models" (in one sense of that word) for example. So I think we are saying 
	this an area of thinking that can be further developed and taken forward :)    (4DKB)
	[10:01] BrandNiemann: We have scheduled tutorials on ontologies and best practices for ontological 
	engineering for our June 2nd Meetup    (4DKC)
	[10:04] ToddSchneider: Brand, could provide the location of the 2 June MeetUp (for the DMV 
	participants).    (4DKD)
	[10:08] BrandNiemann: 8405 Greensboro Dr., Suite 930, McLean, VA 22102 and see details at: 
	http://www.meetup.com/Federal-Big-Data-Working-Group/    (4DKE)
	[9:54] PeterYim: == The Symposium Co-chairs, TimFinin & RamSriram, making some remarks to reflect on 
	the OntologySummit2014_Symposium    (4DKF)
	[9:58] PeterYim: [pertinent to the remarks being made] see: 
	http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014_Symposium    (4DKG)
	[10:01] PeterYim: kudos to ChristiKapp for the HUGE amount of work (and the quality she attained) in 
	post-processing the OntologySummit2014_Symposium material (especially the audio archives) ... see 
	that on the Symposium page under: 
	http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014_Symposium#nid482S    (4DKH)
	[10:04] PeterYim: also thanks to RamSriram for sharing with us the pictures, and a few video clips 
	he captured during the Symposium    (4DKI)
	[10:05] MichaelGruninger: RamSriram's idea: poster session at the Symposium    (4DKJ)
	[10:20] TimFinin: I suggested on the phone that we might try to present an overview of the Ontology 
	Summit (History and latest activities) at AAAI-15 ( http://bit.ly/15Aaai , Austin TX, Jan 25-29), 
	perhaps based on a senior member track summary paper ( http://bit.ly/1lkc5cd ) or an invitation from 
	the AI and the Web track (co-chaired by PascalHitzler)    (4DKK)
	[10:06] PeterYim: == PeterYim presenting on "OntologySummit2014 and OntologySummit(s) in Numbers" ...    (4DKL)
	[10:12] AmandaVizedom: FWIW, I think that the Co-sponsors role experienced some shift in meaning 
	from last year.    (4DKM)
	[10:15] AmandaVizedom: Comment on PeterYim's slide 10: Personally, my focus is on Advancement, 
	rather than Promotion, but I think that Advancement *requires* outreach - our conversations need to 
	continue to diversify.    (4DKN)
	[10:17] LeoObrst: @[13:06] PeterYim's presentation (slide 10): Dedication of contributors: this will 
	be more important next year, when we will not have Peter's great support.    (4DKO)
	[10:16] PeterYim: == AmandaVizedom presenting on "OntologySummit2014 Analytics: some charts from Social Media" ...    (4DKP)
	[10:26] MatthewWest: Sorry, arrived late, now leaving early.    (4DKQ)
	[10:27] AmandaVizedom: As of this moment, Ontology Summit 2014 on Google+ has 72 followers and 5,403 
	views on its posts.    (4DKR)
	[10:27] PeterYim: == Open Discussion-I: postmortem and follow-ups for OntologySummit2014 - All    (4DKS)
	[10:27] PeterYim: (recap from above) [9:48] LeoObrst: More generally: What were the successful 
	aspects of Ontology Summit 2014? What wasn't so successful? And how should we change these for 
	Ontology Summit 2015? What do we need to add?    (4DKT)
	[9:49] ToddSchneider: Successful: Engaged a wider audience.    (4DKU)
	[9:50] ToddSchneider: Not so Successful: Didn't engage the targeted communities to the extent expected.    (4DKV)
	[10:36] BrandNiemann: I want to give praise for the keynotes since I have to leave and thought they 
	were the most valuable to the Big Data Community I am involved with as follows: I have followed up with
	all four of your principal speakers to their requests for additional information on our work as follows:    (4DKW)
	GeorgeStrawn: Research objects as digital objects: 
	http://semanticommunity.info/Data_Science/Big_Data_Science_for_CODATA/Data_Science_Journal and 
	http://semanticommunity.info/Data_Science/Data_Science_for_VIVO    (4DKX)
	FarnamJahanian: NSF Big Data Publications: 
	http://semanticommunity.info/Data_Science/NSF_Big_Data_Publications#Story and 
	http://semanticommunity.info/Data_Science/NSF_Funding_Opportunities_in_Data_Science    (4DKY)
	PhilipBourne: Data Publications in Data Browsers: 
	http://semanticommunity.info/Data_Science/Data_Culture_at_the_NIH    (4DKZ)
	DanielKaufman (and Paul Cohen): June 2nd Meetup on Reading & Reasoning with Semantic Insights for 
	the DARPA Big Mechanism: 
	http://semanticommunity.info/Data_Science/A_Data_Science_Big_Mechanism_for_DARPA#Story    (4DL0)
	GeorgeStrawn challenged us to find another (Semantic Medline on YarcData being the first) best practice 
	example of Big Data and Semantic Web Meet Applied Ontology, or as we like to say Big Data with 
	Semantic Web and Applied Ontology. The one we selected is the new Climate Change Impacts in the 
	United States Report and Web Site, which also happens to be for his boss John Holdren, the 
	Presidents Science Advisor!    (4DL1)
	Our work in progress is at: 
	http://semanticommunity.info/Data_Science/Data_Science_for_Climate_Change#Story This is certainly 
	Big Data and use of the Semantic Web and Applied Ontology: http://data.globalchange.gov/resources  
	which we are building on to make this a Data Publication in a Data Browser.    (4DL2)
	This work is the subject of future Meetups and we hope there are future Applied Ontology Summits on 
	this subject: Big Data with Semantic Web and Applied Ontology.    (4DL3)
	[10:28] MichaelGruninger: === What were the successful aspects of the Tracks?    (4DL4)
	[10:22] ChristophLange: Summary of my input: it's difficult to strike a balance between making 
	co-organizers aware that their "continuous" (not exactly, but pretty much) commitment throughout the 
	summit "season" is needed, and between still keeping it attractive for newcomers to join the 
	organization team. There were several occasions where I had not exactly been aware that another 
	input (usually slides reporting on something) were due. It was all in Peter's emails but sometimes 
	had escaped my attention. But don't get me wrong, I enjoyed very much being a first-time track 
	champion.    (4DL5)
	[10:26] MikeBennett: @Christoph [10:22] that's how it more or less is for all of us. I sometimes 
	think we would not get as much done if we realized in advance what we were getting ourselves into. 
	Peter has always struck the ideal balance of encouraging, expecting and patiently awaiting stuff.    (4DL6)
	[10:31] AmandaVizedom: Good responsiveness of Track content to community input and ongoing 
	conversations.    (4DL7)
	[10:33] MichaelGruninger: Track champions did a great job of synthesis    (4DL8)
	[10:32] AmandaVizedom: I agree with Michael: Tracks did good job with synthesis this year.    (4DL9)
	[10:34] PeterYim: MatthewWest: [input via an earlier email] I thought the summit was good, 
	illustrating the value of/need for lightweight approaches to ontology. Our track, Track C - 
	Bottlenecks, struggled a bit because of how diverse the track turned out to be.    (4DLA)
	[10:35] AmandaVizedom: The tracks were more coherent and useful to overall picture this year than 
	last. That's not a dig at last year's track leads. It may be more a lesson in the consequences of 
	how tracks are divided and defined. Last year's track boundaries turned out not to be so clear, this 
	year's were better.    (4DLB)
	[10:36] MarcelaVegetti: AmandaVizedom [10:35] +1    (4DLC)
	[10:38] RamSriram: I would like to reiterate Tim's comments on the tracks, i.e., it would be nice to 
	have a summary insight on each track. [context: TimFinin suggested that track reports during the 
	Symposium, especially those remotely presented, could improve by sharing insights than just 
	describing what had transpired from the virtual sessions. =ppy]    (4DLD)
	[10:35] anonymous morphed into FrancescaQuattri    (4DLE)
	[10:43] ChristophLange: Summary of my point (made verbally): where track champions "synthesize" 
	specific points from panelists' presentations into the communique, I'd say the track champions 
	assume responsibility for, at least, the factual correctness of these citations. They should also 
	give the panelists (plus, as appropriate, other community members) the chance to review the 
	synthesis before it's finalized.    (4DLF)
	[10:43] AmandaVizedom: ++ for PeterYim's point: It is very important, and should be clear that track 
	champions will be responsible for engaging speakers in their areas.    (4DLG)
	[10:44] PeterYim: @[10:43] AmandaVizedom ... Yes, that was the point made by ChristophLange, but 
	additionally, it is also useful and important that track champions be made responsible for engaging 
	the communities that revolve around their track focus    (4DLH)
	[10:37] MichaelGruninger: === What went well with the Communique?    (4DLI)
	[10:38] ChristophLange: Collaborative commenting in Google Docs worked well.    (4DLJ)
	[10:38] PeterYim: I personally think that this is the best communique we have had so far    (4DLK)
	[10:39] ToddSchneider: I think Leo and Michael did a very nice job of weaving the materials from the 
	tracks into a coherent story.    (4DLL)
	[10:39] BethDiGiulian: I was amazed at how quickly the Communique was compiled and ready for 
	distribution. Great job.    (4DLM)
	[10:40] AndreaWesterinen: I felt that the communique reflected Track A's synthesis, not as a copy 
	but as a continuation and incorporation of our thinking. Also, the ability to contribute to the 
	communique, cooperatively, was great.    (4DLN)
	[10:43] MichaelGruninger: === What went well with the Hackathon? How can we improve the Hackathon?    (4DLO)
	[10:47] RamSriram: Hackathons were great, but it would have been better if we had a strong 
	connection to the theme of the summit.    (4DLP)
	[10:51] TerryLongstreth: @[10:47] RamSriram - beyond adhering to the theme, encourage greater 
	participation of Hackathon-actors with other parts of summit.    (4DLQ)
	[10:47] AmandaVizedom: Good thing: Hackathon did bring in a wider spread of people ... true of some 
	other aspects of summit as well    (4DLR)
	[10:48] AmandaVizedom: Less good: Not SemanticWeb / BigData - driven as much as would have been 
	good.    (4DLS)
	[10:49] AndreaWesterinen: Good thing: Some of the hackathon subjects were directly related to the 
	subject of the Summit.    (4DLT)
	[10:50] AmandaVizedom: Good thing: we engaged more people in the hackathon, and summit generally, 
	including people outside of the applied ontology core.    (4DLU)
	[10:50] PeterYim: a couple of personal regrets were that we weren't able to involve IBM:Watson and 
	Google:knowledge-graph or schema.org work into the hackathons (both of which actually would have 
	lend themselves well to such activities) ... we tried, though.    (4DLV)
	[10:52] AndreaWesterinen: Less bad: Some of the hackathon projects were not really related to the 
	subject of the Summit. This might have splintered the participants, detracting from the more 
	subject-oriented projects.    (4DLW)
	[10:53] MikeBennett: @Andrea agreed, but as a counter to that we did have someone come on to our 
	Hackathon who had been on one of the other hackathons - so it might be a good means to get people 
	engaged?    (4DLX)
	[10:56] AndreaWesterinen: @MikeBennett [10:53] Your experience could enforce my point since you 
	might have had additional participation from the beginning. :-)    (4DLY)
	[10:57] MikeBennett: @Andrea [10:56] maybe - but this was someone from Russia who might not have 
	known of the Summit other than through having participated in the Hackathon over there? It might 
	work both ways I think. We should certainly think of the hackathons as part of the engagement model, 
	but make the topics more focused on the Summit themes.    (4DLZ)
	[10:58] AndreaWesterinen: @MikeBennett [10:57] +1    (4DM0)
	[10:54] AmandaVizedom: Less good: That engagement wasn't that deep. It didn't drive as much as we 
	would have liked. The projects weren't so much framed by the experiences of people who were first 
	and foremost SemanticWeb / BigData users / consumers of ontologies.    (4DM1)
	[10:54] LeoObrst: More direct connection of individual hackathons to specific tracks? Or not?    (4DM2)
	[10:54] AndreaWesterinen: @LeoObrst, +1 although cross-track is also very valuable.    (4DM3)
	[10:54] MichaelGruninger: We might want to start Hackathon planning as soon as the Tracks are 
	determined    (4DM4)
	[10:54] MikeBennett: I agree with Michael's idea to start planning and thinking of themes for 
	Hackathon alongside the tracks i.e. at the beginning - rather than treating it as a "track" in its 
	own right. Would help better alignment to the overall Summit themes without necessarily need to 
	align 1:1 with actual tracks.    (4DM5)
	[10:59] AmandaVizedom: It would be extremely valuable to have hackathon co-organizer(s) who are 
	deeply in the partner communities *and* have time and desire to be very active about bringing those 
	communities insights and efforts into play.    (4DM6)
	[10:56] MichaelGruninger: === What well with the website, mailing list, and other online resources?    (4DM7)
	[10:58] ChristophLange: connection dropping; will continue typing    (4DM8)
	[10:58] ChristophLange: @others, please go ahead    (4DM9)
	[10:59] FrancescaQuattri: One thing that could maybe be addressed is how to better manage the email 
	flow that the Summit brings with it every year. I remember Peter when he mentioned to us that 
	actually a lot of Association members do ask to be put off the list due to that overflow    (4DMA)
	[11:04] FrancescaQuattri: maybe people kind of feel discouraged or overwhelmed by that amount of 
	emails coming in daily    (4DMB)
	[(subsequent)] PeterYim comment: people 'leaving' were usually caused by the exchange losing focus, 
	and not just a result of traffic volume. Moderation by track champions are helping tremendously.    (4DMC)
	[11:00] PeterYim: I still think the "community library" notion has been (and will continue to be) a 
	really good thing (I disagree with Amanda about it not being "worth it") ... the later contribution 
	from JeiBao & LiDing, their automated aggregation (ref. 
	http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/2014-05/msg00005.html ) if combined with the Zotero 
	library would be great!    (4DMD)
	[11:01] AndreaWesterinen: Perhaps have a dedicated person to add links to the library. As a track 
	co-chair, I ran out of time to update the library.    (4DME)
	[11:04] PeterYim: @[11:01] AndreaWesterinen, +1    (4DMF)
	[11:01] AmandaVizedom: RE: AndreaWesterenin's specific thought about other people sending emails or 
	sending links or heads-up to a dedicated library maintainer: I did request that, at an early point, 
	both last year and this year (before switching roles). It didn't happen.    (4DMG)
	[11:01] MikeBennett: I agree that the Library was a Good Thing - based on last year's experience. 
	The issue this year was that although it is quite easy to use, none of us had quite the bandwidth to 
	think of going there and putting things in it. Maybe whoever is the full time web person should also 
	keep the Library afloat.    (4DMH)
	[11:04] TerryLongstreth: I agree with Amanda's point that the populating of libraries should be part 
	of the process of creating material for the summit; whether presentations, reports, hackathon 
	results or ancillary material.    (4DMI)
	[11:00] ChristophLange: In the beginning I had a hard time finding my way on the 
	http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014/GettingOrganized page. There was a lot of 
	content, for example, IIRC, two sections with schedules of phone calls, one tentative, one more 
	concrete. I do agree with PeterYim's point that old content should be archived, but I found it hard 
	to see "the latest state of affairs" at a glance. OTOH I'm sure this comment will soon be obsolete 
	with PSMW.    (4DMJ)
	[11:02] ChristophLange: I was done anyway; I typed what I wanted to say at [11:00]    (4DMK)
	[11:06] AmandaVizedom: IMHO, it would make a big difference if we had all of our online resource 
	infrastructure in place before the Summit launch. Working on it and/or shifting it while underway 
	uses a lot of resources (i.e., takes resources that might be going into the live-action content of 
	the summit) and confuses people.    (4DML)
	[11:02] TimFinin: I'll have to drop off for a meeting. Tim    (4DMM)
	[11:05] MichaelGruninger: == Open Discussion-II: Ideas and suggestion for our next OntologySummit ...    (4DMN)
	[11:05] MichaelGruninger: === What can we add to the Summit to improve it?    (4DMO)
	[11:05] BethDiGiulian: I have to drop off as well. Just want to say that I found the Summit to be 
	extremely well run. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." You had great key notes, good community 
	involvement, clear agendas, good summaries. To me, more explanation about the goals for outcomes of 
	the summit would be good, and you are correct - encourage birds of a feather sessions and consider 
	poster sessions. Thanks!    (4DMP)
	[11:06] PeterYim: @[11:05] BethDiGiulian - Thanks, Beth    (4DMQ)
	[11:07] AmandaVizedom: General Note: LaurentLefort could not make today's session, but provided 
	input via a Google+ post, which can be found here: 
	https://plus.google.com/+LaurentLefort/posts/dwaMCcpH7Tp    (4DMR)
	[11:09] MikeBennett: Not sure how to address this but it's hard to estimate how Peter manages to 
	motivate people to do things e.g. I wasn't going to even do a hackathon. We need some new mechanism 
	for communicating expectations and encouragement to participants who are generally working on a 
	hundred other things.    (4DMS)
	[11:10] RamSriram: I like Leo's idea of putting together a book volume, with additional web 
	pointers.    (4DMT)
	[11:11] RamSriram: I am logging off.    (4DMU)
	[11:14] LeoObrst: Additional products for the Ontology Summit? E.g., the IAOA SWAO SIG hopes to 
	continue the themes of this Summit beyond the AO article. Perhaps a dedicated issue of a journal 
	with the themes of the summit, i.e., invite everyone to submit papers addressing aspects of the 
	themes? Perhaps a follow-on book? Why? Because the Ontology Summit involves such a huge amount of 
	input by very many people that it is a shame to not enable the contributions to be 
	refined/elaborated into a larger snapshot.    (4DMV)
	[11:15] MikeBennett: @Leo 11:14 +1 to that idea - will be good to get presenters and others involved 
	to submit short papers building on what they presented, hacked etc.    (4DMW)
	[11:20] AndreaWesterinen: @All Since we have previously discussed the time commitments involved in 
	participating in the Summit, how do we reconcile that with writing/reviewing/editing papers?    (4DMX)
	[11:18] PeterYim: I like ToddSchneider's idea of doing the book as part of the next summit, but also 
	agree with MichaelGruninger that writing a book with a "crowd" is just daunting ... how about a 
	small number of people starts writing the book and get it to a stage that we can engage the Summit 
	community to review/critique/improve/get-buyin on that, to result in the "definitive book on 
	Ontology Engineering" as the deliverable    (4DMY)
	[11:20] ToddSchneider: Peter, could the small crowd be the IAOA SIG?    (4DMZ)
	[11:21] PeterYim: sure ... I could imagine an optional "small crowd" to be the size of 1 to 3, 
	though (not a committee) ... but that's for IAOA (or the SIG) to decide, if they were to champion it    (4DN0)
	[11:21] AmandaVizedom: + For Book idea: a main shortcoming of most instructional materials, 
	overviews, and tutorials out there is that they are *either* over-fitted to a specific use (without 
	documenting that or how it affects things) *or* they are so high level as to make practical 
	application difficult. Well-focused critical interaction of the sort the Summit can offer is very 
	good for exorcizing those sorts of problems. [I do agree, also, that the project is quite daunting.]    (4DN1)
	[11:32] ChristophLange: @AmandaVizedom [11:21]: What makes it difficult to write a practical book 
	about ontology engineering in general is the variety of ontology _languages_. I guess we wouldn't 
	want to limit ourselves to, say, OWL. But a proper introduction of a _few_ relevant languages (e.g., 
	CL, too) is challenging. Also it's a question how much of the logics background to include.    (4DN2)
	[11:36] AmandaVizedom: ChristophLange [14:32] It is certainly too much to cover all languages. There 
	are editorial decisions to be made. And some will have to be tentatively made ahead of time, to be 
	potentially shredded and re-made but summit folks. But considerable fundamentals can be introduced 
	prior to introduction of any languages, then illustrated in several, for example.    (4DN3)
	[11:20] MikeBennett: Sorry folks I have to drop off now.    (4DN4)
	[11:22] PeterYim: MichaelGruninger: === possible topics for Next Year    (4DN5)
	[11:22] from the Co-chairs slide#7: * The Discipline Ontological Engineering ** Best Practices * 
	Retrospective on previous Summits - where are we now?    (4DN6)
	[11:24] LeoObrst: Thought: given the range of our past Ontology Summit themes, could consider a 
	chapter of a book on ontological engineering on each theme.    (4DN7)
	[11:25] PeterYim: not just the text book, but the "education" that is needed to train enough "good 
	ontologists" for the impending market    (4DN8)
	[11:24] ToddSchneider: Peter, I've found no evidence that IBM is looking for ontologists (as a full 
	time position).    (4DN9)
	[11:25] PeterYim: @Todd: my "IBM looking for ontologists" is only a metaphor    (4DNA)
	[11:26] PeterYim: MichaelGruninger / LeoObrst: === extending the Communique Endorsement deadline    (4DNB)
	[9:52] ToddSchneider: Should extend communique endorsements until at least the beginning of June.    (4DNC)
	[9:52] AmandaVizedom: Last year's extension of endorsement period was partly intended to allow 
	endorsements after presentation at SemTech. Do same for Ram's talk?    (4DND)
	[9:53] ToddSchneider: Amanda, definitely.    (4DNE)
	[11:33] PeterYim: fyi Ram's presentation (on OntologySummit2014) will be at ASE Conference on Big 
	Data Science and Computing is May 27~31 (at Stanford, CA)    (4DNF)
	[11:27] LeoObrst: Extend the date for Communique endorsements? Next steps for planning the future.    (4DNG)
	[11:27] ToddSchneider: No objections: Extend to at least 1 June 2014.    (4DNH)
	[11:32] TerryLongstreth: Make it two weeks after Ram presents    (4DNI)
	[11:31] ToddSchneider: 15 June is okay.    (4DNJ)
	[11:32] AndreaWesterinen: 15 June is okay.    (4DNK)
	[11:32] [consensus] Communique endorsements now extended to 15-Jun-2014    (4DNL)
	[11:33] PeterYim: [action] LeoObrst will make another round of Communique Endorsement solicitations 
	to the suite of relevant community lists that he is subscribed to    (4DNM)
	[11:30] AmandaVizedom: Suggestion: Not just mailing lists. Post the solicitation for endorsements 
	also to SemanticWeb / big data / ontology related groups on LinkedIn, Google+, etc.    (4DNN)
	[11:36] MichaelGruninger: [consensus] First meeting for the Organizing Committee of Ontology Summit 
	2015 will be October 2, 2014    (4DNO)
	[11:37] PeterYim: great session!    (4DNP)
	[11:37] ChristophLange: Thank you all, and thanks PeterYim once more for running this summit!    (4DNQ)
	[11:37] AndreaWesterinen: Yes, thank you for a great summit.    (4DNR)
	[11:37] PeterYim: -- session ended: 11:34am PDT --    (4DNS)
 -- end of in-session chat-transcript --    (4DG2)

Resources:    (4DG9)

For the record ...    (4DH5)

How To Join (while the session is in progress)    (4DH6)

Conference Call Details    (4DCR)

Attendees    (4DDO)