- From: John Graybeal <graybeal@mbari.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:51:23 -0700
- To: Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@uni-muenster.de>
- Cc: public-xg-ssn@w3.org
On Jul 16, 2009, at 1:30 PM, Krzysztof Janowicz wrote: > That's fine with me. What should be the next steps to agree on a > repository? Uh, decide on the most important features and compare existing repositories? For an entirely different community, we created the beginnings of a comparison at [1]. (It only included a few non-wiki repositories in its very preliminary state, but adding columns is easy.) If we want to add rows and maybe even priorities for this community, we might create a new copy for now. Or, anyone is welcome to copy this list to a new location (I can do that on MMI, or you can copy it elsewhere) and tailor it for this community. In a month or two I will be better situated to help drive this evaluation, but not now; and in any case, might be better to have someone without a vested interest take lead. But we're happy to provide access to whatever materials we can. And the hard part is deciding on the most important features. John [1] http://marinemetadata.org/semanticframework/biodiversityrepositoryrequirements On Jul 16, 2009, at 1:30 PM, Krzysztof Janowicz wrote: > Hi John, > >> [...]*except* less OK about the 'release of stable versions' via >> SourceForge. Release of stable versions should be via an ontology >> repository [...] > > That's fine with me. What should be the next steps to agree on a > repository? > > regards, > Krzysztof > > > John Graybeal schrieb: >> I am OK with all of this *except* less OK about the 'release of >> stable >> versions' via SourceForge. Release of stable versions should be via >> an ontology repository, in my humble opinion. This may reflect my >> bias >> toward (a) having only one publication location for the ontology, and >> (b) leveraging the abilities of the repository to provide URI >> resolution and related auxiliary services (e.g., metadata about >> submission, owner, license, etc.; visualizations; and so on). If we >> decide to go the other way I won't have a fit. >> >> Note that I do not consider MMI's repository a collaborative editing >> environment, just to be clear. It might provide a useful home for >> each >> update of the ontology, because of the automatic URI >> generation/resolution. But then that works best at the moment if the >> domain is actually the repository's domain (mmisw.org/ont); we can >> serve ontologies with other domains but haven't set up the magic to >> redirect from those locations to our system and serve those other >> URIs. Would be interesting to try this. >> >> John >> >> On Jul 16, 2009, at 12:14 PM, Krzysztof Janowicz wrote: >> >>> Dear All, >>> >>>> I concur with doing project management at SourceForge, and that >>>> it is >>>> not a suitable way to maintain the ontology versions themselves. >>> >>> do we agree to handle the ontology project management (feature >>> request >>> from external users, forum for discussion, bug tracker, visibility >>> to >>> the public, release of stable versions,...) at sourceforge and >>> look for >>> a collaborative editing environment (WebProtege, OWLdiff, MMI >>> repository,...) for the ontology editing and versioning? I can set >>> up >>> and configure a project at sourceforge and invite everybody >>> (however, >>> IMO Holger should be responsible for the release management and so >>> forth). I also agree that we should look for a pragmatic solution >>> for >>> the licensing, something that allows us all to contribute and is >>> open to >>> external users. >>> >>> Regards >>> Krzysztof >>> >>> >>> John Graybeal schrieb: >>>> I concur with doing project management at SourceForge, and that >>>> it is >>>> not a suitable way to maintain the ontology versions themselves. >>>> An >>>> ontology repository should be selected for maintaining versions >>>> of the >>>> ontology. >>>> >>>> Following is a use case we consider important for MMI's ontology >>>> repository [1]; I would be especially pleased to use any >>>> combination >>>> that supports it. >>>> >>>> 1) The first version of the ontology is submitted to the server. A >>>> service automatically provides dereferencing for the URIs for all >>>> the >>>> concepts in the ontology. >>>> 2) A second version is submitted to the server. New URIs are >>>> created >>>> for all the concepts that have changed. (Philosophically, I'd >>>> like new >>>> URIs for all the concepts, but I appreciate that some have visceral >>>> issues with that approach.) >>>> 3) Any concept that is changed is automatically pointed back (in >>>> RDF) >>>> to its predecessor using an invertible relationship. >>>> >>>> With this use case accomplished, versions are automatically >>>> tracked. >>>> Equally important, someone who uses a concept (URI) at a particular >>>> stage of the ontology's development has a method to (a) guarantee >>>> the >>>> concept doesn't change from under them, and (b) follow the trail to >>>> any subsequent versions of that concept, should they need to do so. >>>> >>>> The MMI repository has this capability, but does not have >>>> concept-level differencing capabilities (yet), and does not support >>>> wiki-like editing of terms, the way WebProtege (for example) is >>>> intended to. But it is offered to this project for its other >>>> features, >>>> should those be useful. >>>> >>>> John >>>> >>>> [1] MMI Ontology Registry and Repository: http://mmisw.org/or >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jul 16, 2009, at 12:33 AM, Oscar Corcho wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Sorry to jump in in this conversation without having attended the >>>>> last two conference calls, due to travelling. While I agree with >>>>> all >>>>> the statements about community based development with >>>>> Sourceforge, I >>>>> must say that this approach has been tried unsuccessfully in >>>>> different sets of activities that I have been participating in the >>>>> past. The main problem with this is the following: source >>>>> versioning >>>>> systems are focused on detecting changes/deltas in source code, >>>>> but >>>>> not in ontology code. When a person makes a change in an ontology >>>>> with an ontology editor, the most important fact is that the >>>>> serialization of the ontology may be **completely different** to >>>>> the >>>>> previous one, in terms of the ordering of the RDF triples that >>>>> appear >>>>> in the file, what makes tracking of changes almost impossible for >>>>> humans. >>>>> >>>>> I think that Raúl was commenting the possibility of using >>>>> WebProtégé, >>>>> which allows discussions over ontology terms, and probably we >>>>> could >>>>> go for a mixture of technologies/approaches: WebProtégé for the >>>>> collaboration part on pure ontology development, and sourceforge >>>>> for >>>>> the bug tracking, the community involvement, and the releases of >>>>> specific versions of the ontologies. >>>>> >>>>> What do you think? >>>>> >>>>> Oscar >>>>> >>>>> -----Mensaje original----- >>>>> De: public-xg-ssn-request@w3.org >>>>> [mailto:public-xg-ssn-request@w3.org] En nombre de Krzysztof >>>>> Janowicz >>>>> Enviado el: jueves, 16 de julio de 2009 8:44 >>>>> Para: public-xg-ssn@w3.org >>>>> Asunto: Re: SSN-XG Meeting Minutes 15-July-2009 >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>>> Also, I like the idea presented in today’s meeting regarding >>>>>> posting >>>>>> the ontology to a popular forum such as sourceforge.net using >>>>>> an open >>>>>> license (e.g. Apache/BSD variant) once a suitable baseline is >>>>>> available. >>>>> Thanks, there are basically three reasons why I brought this up >>>>> yesterday. first, a platform such as sourceforge offers us a very >>>>> useful >>>>> architecture. we can develop the sensor (and observation) ontology >>>>> together using SVN as versioning system and hence document our >>>>> design >>>>> decisions (and that is what ontology is about). somebody like >>>>> holger >>>>> could act as release manager and make official releases every x >>>>> weeks. >>>>> on one side, this would give as some regular schedule (and >>>>> pressure) to >>>>> make our recent changes coherent. on the other side, interested >>>>> people >>>>> can always browse the SVN at sourceforge directly to see what is >>>>> happening right now. moreover, sourceforge offers a forum, a bug >>>>> tracker, and especially also a feature request form. we can use >>>>> these >>>>> features to coordinate our work on the ontology but also to get >>>>> feedback >>>>> from others. second, if we host the ontology (no matter in which >>>>> stage) >>>>> at sourceforge people will start to use it and give us feedback. >>>>> this is >>>>> also about transparency - having the ontology only on our wiki >>>>> makes it >>>>> difficult for others to find out who is responsible for which >>>>> parts, who >>>>> should be contacted, and so on. third, IMO the licensing issue >>>>> is an >>>>> important decision. everybody should be free to use the ontology >>>>> and to >>>>> modify (fork) it if necessary (especially because our work is also >>>>> based >>>>> on other ontologies). finally, having it at a platform like >>>>> sourceforge >>>>> makes sure that work on the ontology can also continue (and be >>>>> supported >>>>> by others) after the incubator group ran out. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Krzysztof >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Kelsey, William D schrieb: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi All, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I’m new to the group (today was my second meeting). I would be >>>>>> interested to learn if anyone has draft use cases that are >>>>>> driving >>>>>> the >>>>>> Sensor/Observation ontology/ontologies. If so, can they be >>>>>> shared? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Also, I like the idea presented in today’s meeting regarding >>>>>> posting >>>>>> the ontology to a popular forum such as sourceforge.net using >>>>>> an open >>>>>> license (e.g. Apache/BSD variant) once a suitable baseline is >>>>>> available. Hopefully this approach would promote increased >>>>>> exposure >>>>>> for both adoption and refinement. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>> W. David Kelsey >>>>>> Boeing Research & Technology >>>>>> Information Management & Transformation >>>>>> (206)662-3963 >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:* Holger.Neuhaus@csiro.au [mailto:Holger.Neuhaus@csiro.au] >>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 15, 2009 2:05 PM >>>>>> *To:* public-xg-ssn@w3.org >>>>>> *Subject:* SSN-XG Meeting Minutes 15-July-2009 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you all for a really productive meeting. >>>>>> >>>>>> The draft minutes are available at: >>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2009/07/15-ssn-minutes.html >>>>>> >>>>>> Please let me invite you to continue the discussion on the >>>>>> mailing >>>>>> list. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Summary of Action Items* >>>>>> >>>>>> **[NEW]** **ACTION:** all discuss the versioning etc. of the >>>>>> ontology >>>>>> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/15-ssn-minutes.html#action01 >>>>>> ] >>>>>> **[NEW]** **ACTION:** Cory to put up logistics page for f2f >>>>>> [recorded >>>>>> in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/15-ssn-minutes.html#action03] >>>>>> **[NEW]** **ACTION:** Krzysztof to organise O&M ontology meeting >>>>>> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/15-ssn-minutes.html#action02 >>>>>> ] >>>>>> >>>>>> The XG’s Wiki page is accessible at: >>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/wiki/Main_Page >>>>>> >>>>>> Please let me invite you to use this forum for discussions on the >>>>>> development of the Semantic Markup and the Ontology*//* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> >>>>>> Holger >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Dr. Holger Neuhaus* >>>>>> Post-Doctoral Research Fellow >>>>>> Tasmanian ICT Centre >>>>>> CSIRO >>>>>> >>>>>> Phone: +61 3 6232 5547* | *Fax: +61 3 6232 5000 >>>>>> holger.neuhaus@csiro.au <mailto:holger.neuhaus@csiro.au> *|* >>>>>> www.csiro.au <http://www.csiro.au> *|* >>>>>> www.csiro.au/science/TasICTCentre.html >>>>>> <http://www.csiro.au/science/TasICTCentre.html> >>>>>> >>>>>> Address: GPO Box 1538, Hobart TAS 7001, Australia >>>>>> >>>>>> //The Tasmanian ICT Centre is jointly funded by the Australian >>>>>> Government through the Intelligent Island Program and CSIRO. The >>>>>> Intelligent Island Program is administered by the Tasmanian >>>>>> Department >>>>>> of Economic Development and Tourism.// >>>>>> >>>>>> *PLEASE NOTE* >>>>>> The information contained in this email may be confidential or >>>>>> privileged. Any unauthorised use or disclosure is prohibited. >>>>>> If you >>>>>> have received this email in error, please delete it immediately >>>>>> and >>>>>> notify the sender by return email. Thank you. To the extent >>>>>> permitted >>>>>> by law, CSIRO does not represent, warrant and/or guarantee that >>>>>> the >>>>>> integrity of this communication has been maintained or that the >>>>>> communication is free of errors, virus, interception or >>>>>> interference. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Please consider the environment before printing this email.* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Krzysztof Janowicz >>>>> Institut für Geoinformatik >>>>> Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster >>>>> Weseler Straße 253 >>>>> D-48151 Münster >>>>> fon: 0049 - 251 - 83 39764 >>>>> fax: 0049 - 251 - 83 39763 >>>>> janowicz@uni-muenster.de >>>>> http://ifgi.uni-muenster.de/~janowicz >>>>> >>>>> 'Die Wahrheit ist das Kind der Zeit, nicht der Autorität' >>>>> (Bertolt Brecht) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Comprobada por AVG - www.avg.es >>>>> Versión: 8.5.375 / Base de datos de virus: 270.13.15/2239 - >>>>> Fecha de >>>>> la versión: 07/15/09 17:58:00 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> John >>>> >>>> -------------- >>>> John Graybeal <mailto:graybeal@mbari.org> -- 831-775-1956 >>>> Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute >>>> Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: http://marinemetadata.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Krzysztof Janowicz >>> Institut für Geoinformatik >>> Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster >>> Weseler Straße 253 >>> D-48151 Münster >>> fon: 0049 - 251 - 83 39764 >>> fax: 0049 - 251 - 83 39763 >>> janowicz@uni-muenster.de >>> http://ifgi.uni-muenster.de/~janowicz >>> >>> 'Die Wahrheit ist das Kind der Zeit, nicht der Autorität' >>> (Bertolt Brecht) >>> >>> >> >> >> John >> >> -------------- >> John Graybeal <mailto:graybeal@mbari.org> -- 831-775-1956 >> Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute >> Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: http://marinemetadata.org >> >> >> > > > -- > Krzysztof Janowicz > Institut für Geoinformatik > Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster > Weseler Straße 253 > D-48151 Münster > fon: 0049 - 251 - 83 39764 > fax: 0049 - 251 - 83 39763 > janowicz@uni-muenster.de > http://ifgi.uni-muenster.de/~janowicz > > 'Die Wahrheit ist das Kind der Zeit, nicht der Autorität' > (Bertolt Brecht) > John -------------- John Graybeal <mailto:graybeal@mbari.org> -- 831-775-1956 Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: http://marinemetadata.org
Received on Thursday, 16 July 2009 20:52:05 UTC