OpenOntologyRepository: "Revisiting the OOR Strategy and Tactics" Discussion Session - Tue 2013_05_28    (3T9L)

Session Topic: OOR Strategy-III: "Revisiting the OOR Strategy and Tactics - I" Discussion    (3UNW)

Session Co-chairs: PeterYim & MikeDean    (3UNX)

This is a regular OOR Team meeting. The last time we did "OOR Strategy & Tactics" was in Nov-2012. Since it has been six months already, and so much has happened since, particularly the very successful OntologySummit2013 and the OntologySummit2013_Hackathon_Clinics activities which OOR members had a strong presence, it is high time we take a good look at the OOR Strategy & Tactics again. We will do some soul searching, as well as pick up from where we left off at OOR/ConferenceCall_2012_11_20.    (3T9M)

Conference Call Details:    (3T9N)

Attendees:    (3TCG)

Agenda Ideas:    (3TCX)

Agenda & Proceedings    (3TD6)

Archives:    (3TD7)

1. Meeting called to order:    (3TDA)

2. Roll Call:    (3TDF)

3. Key discussion:    (3TDI)

most of the content below are inherited from the previous call(s), and will be edited/updated as this meeting progresses ...    (3TEG)

4. Prior Discussions:    (3TEH)

4.1 Discussion: tactically, what shall we be doing differently in the next 6 to 12 months    (3TEI)

4.2 Setting the metrics - what does "success" look like    (3TEO)

4.3 Action planning for "content drive" (getting people to upload ontologies) ... (deferred discussion of this item)    (3TEP)

5. IM Chat Transcript captured during the session:    (3TFH)

 see raw transcript here.    (3TFI)
 (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.    (3TFJ)
 -- begin in-session chat-transcript --    (3TFK)
	[8:26] PeterYim: welcome to the    (3TNI)
	 = OpenOntologyRepository: "Revisiting the OOR Strategy and Tactics" Discussion Session - Tue 2013_05_28 =    (3TNJ)
	session page:    (3TNK)
	Attendees: PeterYim (co-chair), MikeDean (co-chair), BobSmith, LeoObrst, MichaelGruninger, 
	MikeBennett, OliverKutz, TillMossakowski.    (3TNL)
	 == Proceedings: ==    (3TNM)
	[8:28] PeterYim: Hi Michael ...    (3TNN)
	[8:37] PeterYim: == starting session with the slides ...    (3TNO)
	[8:50] PeterYim: == our SWOT analysis ...    (3TNP)
	[8:50] PeterYim: === "Strength": one (or two) top "value" you are gaining that makes you think the 
	time you put into OOR is worth it    (3TNQ)
	[8:51] MichaelGruninger: collaboration opportunities ... coordination of our individual efforts with 
	ontology repositories    (3TNR)
	[8:51] MikeBennett: The potential for common, shared semantics for reuse in our standards efforts.    (3TNS)
	[8:51] TillMossakowski: the decentralized service-based architecture    (3TNT)
	[8:52] MikeDean: leading edge for anticipated future repository BAAs and other procurements    (3TNU)
	[8:52] LeoObrst: When we first started, there were no ontology repositories, and in fact many 
	thought there was no need. I think they are still absolutely necessary: for ontology and vocabulary 
	mapping and interoperability, with supporting services.    (3TNV)
	[8:52] PeterYim: potential of being part of an infrastructure initiative that creates a component 
	which will fill a strategic gap for Ontology (as a technology and a discipline) to grow    (3TNW)
	[9:00] PeterYim: out of curiosity ... was "mutual help to get funded" a value to people?    (3TNX)
	[9:02] PeterYim: responses: ... useful for projects like: SOCoP, Ken, Till ... Michael (not so far, 
	but later)    (3TNY)
	[9:03] PeterYim: === "Weakness": if you had thought of quitting from OOR, what would have been the 
	key reason(s) ... don't say "not enough time" though, as that is just a matter of priority ... 
	provide the next granular-level response, "why is this not worth spending your precious time on?"    (3TNZ)
	[9:05] PeterYim: it is not making the kind of impact I would have hoped it will (at least not so 
	far)    (3TO0)
	[9:06] LeoObrst: Too slow progress relative to other efforts: Ontology Summit, Earth Science - 
	Ontology series, many work projects.    (3TO1)
	[9:06] MikeDean: limited direct return on investment so far    (3TO2)
	[9:06] MichaelGruninger: lack of progress on common architecture    (3TO3)
	[9:06] MikeBennett: If we weren't producing our ontologies in OWL (which we now are); if we could 
	not find suitably reusable, standards-based ontologies (which we haven't really looked for); or if 
	my management were not aware of OOR because it's down in the weeds from their perspective and they 
	don't really know what it adds to my deliverables bottom line.    (3TO4)
	[9:07] TillMossakowski: there has been no implementation apart from BioPortal (and even the OOR 
	modifications of BioPortal are trivial). I think OOR's top-down approach for software implementation 
	does not work.    (3TO5)
	[9:14] PeterYim: ==== what is the one thing that the team could do to mitigate the issue you cited above    (3TO6)
	[9:17] LeoObrst: Joint funding would help. Also, perhaps we should position OOR as providing plugin 
	services to BioPortal, e.g., rather than trying to do it all.    (3TO7)
	[9:17] MichaelGruninger: perhaps try a bottom-up approach, where we address the OOR issues in the 
	context of our individual projects, and then come together to identify how we can best coordinate 
	work, share ideas, and reuse implementations    (3TO8)
	[9:17] MikeDean: identifying a qualified funding opportunity    (3TO9)
	[9:23] LeoObrst: Following on Mike Dean's comments: some of us had hoped that big science NSF 
	efforts such as EarthCube would show the need for ontology repositories, and thereby push some 
	funding.    (3TOA)
	[9:17] TillMossakowski: funding will help, we need more resources for ontology development and 
	implementation    (3TOB)
	[9:17] MikeBennett: If the OOR repository contained the standard ontologies we would use as a key 
	part of our shared semantics strategy. And made some contribution to how those are accessed and 
	referenced etc.    (3TOC)
	[9:17] PeterYim: to increase OOR's impact: get into one of two domains where OOR will the default 
	place for those people to find their ontologies (like what BioPortal is doing for the biomedical 
	informatics domain.)    (3TOD)
	[9:25] MikeBennett: One or two domains: ontologies based in law, commerce and accounting would 
	provide many of our building blocks. Also real estate, construction.    (3TOE)
	[9:26] LeoObrst: I don't think a domain focus will help. I think BioPortal is not bound to just 
	biomedical ontologies.    (3TOF)
	[9:34] PeterYim: domain possibilities: SOCoP (geospatial), OntologyBasedStandards, Finance (FIBO, 
	accounting, legal, real estate), Academic Papers (Gruninger ...)    (3TOG)
	[9:41] PeterYim: Till: we are focusing on a couple of domains too: SpacePortal, ConceptPortal, 
	(similar to BioPortal)    (3TOH)
	[9:37] anonymous morphed into BobSmith    (3TOI)
	[9:41] PeterYim: === "Opportunity": given what we have now, what is the one (or two) thing we can do 
	that would allow OOR to make a huge (at least meaningful) impact    (3TOJ)
	[9:44] MikeBennett: Make the published standards ontologies available that have wide application 
	e.g. W3C Organization, as they become available. And make their status, usage clear and accessible.    (3TOK)
	[9:44] PeterYim: (as before) build domain focus and reach out to the domains ... in order of 
	viability - Academic paper, Finance, Standards, ...    (3TOL)
	[9:44] LeoObrst: Unsure really. Maybe provide services for some of the Ontology Summit ontology 
	evaluation tools, vocabulary->ontology mapping service, enhanced ontology/vocabulary versioning 
	service.    (3TOM)
	[10:01] TillMossakowski: we will provide ontology mapping and versioning on Ontohub soon (before Sept.)    (3TON)
	[9:45] MichaelGruninger: content that will be used by multiple users and communities    (3TOO)
	[9:45] BobSmith: BIM (Building Information Modeling and resulting models) are at the heart of city 
	sustainability thinking- and some OOR efforts have been going on (IN Germany, esp.) for several 
	years. Simply need better awareness between those doing BIM OOR and those needing BIM OOR...    (3TOP)
	[9:45] PeterYim: (a totally separate idea that came out of the OntologySummit2013 postmortem 
	session) tackle: what we could do to enable/improve "Reasoning over the LOD Cloud"    (3TOQ)
	[9:45] TillMossakowski: come up with software tools that help in the daily ontology development and 
	maintenance work    (3TOR)
	[9:45] MikeDean: Identifying a significant corpus of ontologies that a community needs help 
	navigating. In addition to standards, ontology design patterns might be a good candidate.    (3TOS)
	[9:53] MikeDean: We could populate ODPs in OOR from    (3TOT)
	[9:54] MikeDean: GaryBergCross and KrzysztofJanowicz have been advocating use of ODPs in SOCoP (and 
	SOCoP OOR) for some time    (3TOU)
	[9:48] MikeBennett: Can I suggest a second thing: ontology visualization, as an aid to people 
	knowing what they can reuse and how.    (3TOV)
	[9:46] MichaelGruninger: note from earlier: a student project will start in September to harvest 
	ontologies from the journal and conference literature    (3TOW)
	[9:53] MichaelGruninger: @Till: yes, the plan was to upload the ontologies to OntoHub    (3TOX)
	[9:57] LeoObrst: Folks, I must leave at 1 pm.    (3TOY)
	[9:57] TillMossakowski: me too    (3TOZ)
	[9:58] MikeDean: Perhaps there's a branding opportunity for an OntologyStore or OntStore, leveraging 
	some of the current buzz over various AppStores in the mobile and (at least within government 
        / DoD software procurement /) desktop space.    (3TP0)
	[9:59] BobSmith: NOTE - Linked Open Data vs. Levels of Detail (of a BIM Model)    (3TP2)
	[10:02] LeoObrst: Bye, folks!    (3TP3)
	[10:04] PeterYim: Part-2 of this "Strategy-Tactics" session is now scheduled for Tue 2013.06.18 ... 
	(MichaelGruninger will not be available on Jun-25) ... Thanks to agreement by TillMossakowski to 
	swap their hackathon session date, the "OOR-Ontohub-Gatekeeper API" Hackathon Session (co-chairs: 
	TillMossakowski & KenBaclawski) will now be on Tue 2013.06.25    (3TP4)
	[10:06] PeterYim: great session ... thanks everyone for your input! ... I think the ideas support 
	one another very well and viable solutions are emerging ... let's continue on Tue 2013.06.18 same 
	time ... talk to you all then! (Note that there will be no OOR meeting on Jun-4 and Jun-11.)    (3TP5)
	[10:06] PeterYim: -- session ended: 10:05am PDT --    (3TP6)
 -- end in-session chat-transcript --    (3TFL)

6. (Other) Action items:    (3TFM)

7. Any Other Business:    (3TFO)

8. Schedule Next Meeting & Adjourn:    (3TFQ)

 notes taken by: PeterYim / 2013.05.28-11:40am PDT
 All participants, please review and edit to enhance accuracy and granularity of the documented proceedings.    (3TFX)

Resources    (3TFY)