IAOA Wiki - User contributions [en]

SWAO:Conference Call 20210510

2021-05-28T20:17:03Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::90]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::May 17 2021 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00am PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 7:00pm BST/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

THIS MEETING WILL TAKE PLACE ON MONDAY 17 MAY

(please ignore the date implied in the page title)

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at 2pm Eastern Time.

* We use GoToMeeting for these meetings - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Latest post for the IAOA website
* Ontology Articulation Guidelines
* Housekeeping
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==
=== Logistics ===
==== New SWAO Convenor ====
MB: New contract. Will be challenged for running this meeting.

Ken would be able to do this.

AW: happy to be the new Convenor.

Outcome: Andrea Westerinen is the new Convenor for this SIG

MB would try to attend where possible.

==== Meeting Facilities ====
AW does not have a meeting facility. Options:

KB Zoom account - can give AW the meeting ID.

==== IAOA logins ====
MB has admin but is not a member

AW has a message that the old account is not working.

AW needed to be able to log in to post notes etc. (for SWAO)

KB: Please do not post notes for SWAO - all postings go to Emilio.

This is different to the login for the wiki for these meetings (which e.g. MB does have despite not being a member of IAOA)

AW can log in to the SWAO wiki but not the IAOA page.

KB: The plan with the IAOA is to have an LDAP server so there is only 1 login for all the services - INCLUDING the wiki we are using for these calls.

Single login but with different privileges, e.g. if you were not a member of IAOA but can edit these SWAO wiki pages.

==== IAOA Membership ====
MB How do I join the IAOA?

KB: This is currently still not free, and people are able to join and pay dues.

These are renewals, in the last couple of weeks.

AW There is a joining page.

It is now EUR50 (previously $30).

=== 1. Latest post for the IAOA website ===
==== New post: possible content ====

Announce new convenor for this group

==== IAOA Web Page ====
So, to what to put on the IAOA web page for SWAO

AW: happy to be the new Convenor.

Conclusion: we will put that in the web posting (nobody objected).

What else?

We did not do one last month.

Have we done a web post since the interesting presentation that Andrea gave to the group on events?

Last post was in January

==== Last Post text ====

Ken Baclawski: The Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) Special Interest Group is actively involved in the Ontology Summit 2021: Ontology Generation and Harmonization. Harmonization is especially relevant to SWAO because the purpose of SWAO is to help bridge between communities. Ontologies are now routinely being extracted and generated from a large variety of sources, but without articulating the intended purpose or type of the ontologies. Track A of the summit will survey the landscape of ontology types and purposes. Track B will survey the notion of a definition for bridging between different ontologies and between ontologies and people via natural language. Track C is concerned with bridging between the machine learning and ontology communities. Track D considers the organizational aspects of ontologies, especially sustainability of ontologies and their ecosystems.

AW: We talked about a bunch of interesting things since then, including last month's discussions about TLOs.

There is some convergence e.g. Track B is about definitions etc.

Ken Baclawski: Previous post (November): The Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) Special Interest Group is embarking on a project to develop ontology articulation guidelines. There are different kinds of ontology for different purpose, such as concrete solutions to specific engineering problems and models for conceptualization. We will articulate the distinctions among various purposes, with different guidelines for different purposes. The intent of this project is to create a guide that will be easy enough to use, but still provide a greater measure of ontological analysis. The guidelines will be expressed as a collection of wiki pages on wiki.iaoa.org and will build on the terminology on this wiki.

==== Ontology Summit Items of Relevance ====
Was there a track where we talked about ontology styles? MB presented on this at some track chaired by Todd and Ravi

We think that was Track A.

==== Conclusion ====
We have done considerable work since then, e.g. Andrea's presentation at SWAO, last month's conversation, and Ken's presentation at OS on Shimmering Semantics.

==== Actions ====
So we have stuff to write up; how shall we have it written?

AW an take a stab at this as the new Convenor and send it on the mail list to the 5 of us.

=== 2: Ontology Articulation Guidelines ===
==== Status ====
Where did we leave the action?

We were trying to work out where the Education Committee was on this. Todd was looking at that.

TS: EdC more focused on FOIS at present. They have agreed to a general outline they would ask people to provide content for

RR: In the Ed C we are working on 'what is an education series' and identifying folks interested in specific topics. that has been the main focus

Also focus on Bolzano FOIS meeting in Sept.

That will likely be the focus of the EdC meetings for the next couple of months.

RR has raised other topics but the focus is in FOIS and the Education Series. Can raise additional points at next meeting if we have them.

==== Definition of Ontology Articulation ====
Andrea Westerinen: What does Ontology Articulation mean?

Andrea Westerinen: So, is this about ontology purpose/audience, ontology definition/communication (is this tied to purpose and audience), specific ontology details, and then onto reuse/maintenance/...?

Andrea Westerinen: This might be our outline.

ToddSchneider: From the last IAOA Education Meeting:

===== 7b. desirable topics =====

Topics of interest for the ESAO Launch Event:

whats an ontology

ontological analysis

ontology applications

upper ontologies / types of ontologies

core topics

mereology

perdurants, 3D/4D

material constitution

...

ontology development methodologies

ontology languages & logic

Classical topics for ISAO:

whats an ontology (sense? applied, formal, computational, etc.?)

Nicola Guarino

Antony Galton

Achille Varzi

Chris Welty / Dean Allemang / Tom Gruber

ontological analysis

upper ontologies / types of ontologies

mereology

time, perdurants, 3D/4D etc

ontology and conceptual modelling

ontology and natural language

ontology and the semantic web

ontology matching

ontology evaluation

ontology languages & logic

FOL and DLs

ontology development methodologies

==== Comments ====
AW: We don't need to raise something to EdC specifically - see material pasted above from last month (2 items above).

TS: Aim is to provide short videos on line.

1 topic is 'Upper ontologies / Types of ontology'; as well as 'What is an ontology?'

Also from our last notes: what does ontology articulation mean?

MB: So several of the things above feed into our focus, e.g. the kind of ontology for conceptual modeling differs from reasoning ontology differs from natural language processing ontology.

RR has some material on types of ontology - would be happy to have input from others here.

AW, MB would love to see this; TS maybe but busy.

AW working on Events and putting something into a KG on that.

AW and RR can brainstorm on this.

KB: has some work on dimensions and ontologies. From OS some years ago.

Will forward to RR.

Clarify: by Dimensions does he mean the 3D / 4D ontology styles or something else?

A: Something else.

==== Previous Ontology Summits Material ====
See 2007 Ontology Summit

RR: There is a lot of great material from these earlier Summits. We should revisit those.

Are these old Summit pages all findable on the current set of pages?

Ken Baclawski: Material on kinds of ontologies from 2007: https://ken.baclawski.com/pub/2008/06/links.html

MB hunch: most TLOs seem to have 2 kinds of matter: the partitioning of the world and something about how you characterize, measure et. those things (e.g. value spaces)

RR: this also includes distinctions between data and real things as pieces of knowledge e.g. measures.

These come down to the philosophy of the way that TLO or FO approaches these things.

This is the thing MB is looking for a word for.

Let's look at the 2007 link...

KB is at COGSIMA this week - doing a workshop on interoperability of situations later this week.

TS: Clarify what that means?

KB: See draft communique. Agenda item of the Workshop.

==== SCOPE model ====
TS working on a Scope model, one aspect of which is analysis for interoperability. May also apply to orgs and their processes.

TS: Would be interested to have Hans Polzer give some feedback on this.

KB: However, HP is one of the authors of this.

RR: can TS send details about the scope thing he's talking about?

TS: This is available on the web. It needs work.

ToddSchneider: SCOPE MODEL (and related artifacts) https://www.engineeringsemantics.com/scope.html

Andrea Westerinen: SCOPE is about analyzing interop NEEDS

SCOPE - for organizational and information systems, Whether the need for a conceptual ontology emerges from this remains to be seen.

Does not mention ontology at all (either as a consequence of interoperality, OR as a thing that needs interoperating between).

TS: Recommend we look at the spreadsheet of questions and skip the model.

They are working on a v2 of this.

This is in addition to domain dependency questions .

TS: this requires a similar mindset to what you need for ontology development

Mindset for scope models and ontologies is similar.

==== Foundational ontologies ====
RR: on the UO topic: found a new Foundational Ontology, is corresponding with the developers. Called ???

RR will find the name. Planning to collect links to papers and post to the Ontolog Forum.

=== AoB ===
==== Ken Workshop Draft Communique Questions ====

RR: looking at a version of this - what's the current one? Has potential comments.

RR: There are some inaccuracies I would like to raise.

KB: This is based on what people said at the workshop, so this is not necessarily coherent and may not reflect our consensus view for example

KB: People welcome to comment.

KB to give RR the Zoom link to comment on that.

Clarify to RR how to make comments: Send these to KB.

This is the communique for Ken's workshop.

=== Next Meeting ===

First Monday of June is not a PH and that is when we will meet.

These meetings notes: MB to post those.

== Attendees ==

* Todd Schneider
* Mike Bennett
* Robert Rovetto
* Ken Baclawski
* Andrea Westerinen

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20210510

2021-05-28T20:14:25Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::90]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::May 17 2021 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00am PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 7:00pm BST/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

THIS MEETING WILL TAKE PLACE ON MONDAY 17 MAY

(please ignore the date implied in the page title)

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at 2pm Eastern Time.

* We use GoToMeeting for these meetings - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Latest post for the IAOA website
* Ontology Articulation Guidelines
* Housekeeping
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==
=== Logistics ===
==== New SWAO Convenor ====
MB: New contract. Will be challenged for running this meeting.

Ken would be able to do this.

AW: happy to be the new Convenor.

Outcome: Andrea Westerinen is the new Convenor for this SIG

MB would try to attend where possible.

==== Meeting Facilities ====
AW does not have a meeting facility. Options:

KB Zoom account - can give AW the meeting ID.

==== IAOA logins ====
MB has admin but is not a member

AW has a message that the old account is not working.

AW needed to be able to log in to post notes etc. (for SWAO)

KB: Please do not post notes for SWAO - all postings go to Emilio.

This is different to the login for the wiki for these meetings (which e.g. MB does have despite not being a member of IAOA)

AW can log in to the SWAO wiki but not the IAOA page.

KB: The plan with the IAOA is to have an LDAP server so there is only 1 login for all the services - INCLUDING the wiki we are using for these calls.

Single login but with different privileges, e.g. if you were not a member of IAOA but can edit these SWAO wiki pages.

==== IAOA Membership ====
MB How do I join the IAOA?

KB: This is currently still not free, and people are able to join and pay dues.

These are renewals, in the last couple of weeks.

AW There is a joining page.

It is now EUR50 (previously $30).

=== 1. Latest post for the IAOA website ===
==== New post: possible content ====

Announce new convenor for this group

==== IAOA Web Page ====
So, to what to put on the IAOA web page for SWAO

AW: happy to be the new Convenor.

Conclusion: we will put that in the web posting (nobody objected).

What else?

We did not do one last month.

Have we done a web post since the interesting presentation that Andrea gave to the group on events?

Last post was in January

==== Last Post text ====

Ken Baclawski: The Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) Special Interest Group is actively involved in the Ontology Summit 2021: Ontology Generation and Harmonization. Harmonization is especially relevant to SWAO because the purpose of SWAO is to help bridge between communities. Ontologies are now routinely being extracted and generated from a large variety of sources, but without articulating the intended purpose or type of the ontologies. Track A of the summit will survey the landscape of ontology types and purposes. Track B will survey the notion of a definition for bridging between different ontologies and between ontologies and people via natural language. Track C is concerned with bridging between the machine learning and ontology communities. Track D considers the organizational aspects of ontologies, especially sustainability of ontologies and their ecosystems.

AW: We talked about a bunch of interesting things since then, including last month's discussions about TLOs.

There is some convergence e.g. Track B is about definitions etc.

Ken Baclawski: Previous post (November): The Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) Special Interest Group is embarking on a project to develop ontology articulation guidelines. There are different kinds of ontology for different purpose, such as concrete solutions to specific engineering problems and models for conceptualization. We will articulate the distinctions among various purposes, with different guidelines for different purposes. The intent of this project is to create a guide that will be easy enough to use, but still provide a greater measure of ontological analysis. The guidelines will be expressed as a collection of wiki pages on wiki.iaoa.org and will build on the terminology on this wiki.

==== Ontology Summit Items of Relevance ====
Was there a track where we talked about ontology styles? MB presented on this at some track chaired by Todd and Ravi

We think that was Track A.

==== Conclusion ====
We have done considerable work since then, e.g. Andrea's presentation at SWAO, last month's conversation, and Ken's presentation at OS on Shimmering Semantics.

==== Actions ====
So we have stuff to write up; how shall we have it written?

AW an take a stab at this as the new Convenor and send it on the mail list to the 5 of us.

=== 2: Ontology Articulation Guidelines ===
==== Status ====
Where did we leave the action?

We were trying to work out where the Education Committee was on this. Todd was looking at that.

TS: EdC more focused on FOIS at present. They have agreed to a general outline they would ask people to provide content for

RR: In the Ed C we are working on 'what is an education series' and identifying folks interested in specific topics. that has been the main focus

Also focus on Bolzano FOIS meeting in Sept.

That will likely be the focus of the EdC meetings for the next couple of months.

RR has raised other topics but the focus is in FOIS and the Education Series. Can raise additional points at next meeting if we have them.

==== Definition of Ontology Articulation ====
Andrea Westerinen: What does Ontology Articulation mean?

Andrea Westerinen: So, is this about ontology purpose/audience, ontology definition/communication (is this tied to purpose and audience), specific ontology details, and then onto reuse/maintenance/...?

Andrea Westerinen: This might be our outline.

ToddSchneider: From the last IAOA Education Meeting:

===== 7b. desirable topics =====

Topics of interest for the ESAO Launch Event:

whats an ontology

ontological analysis

ontology applications

upper ontologies / types of ontologies

core topics

mereology

perdurants, 3D/4D

material constitution

...

ontology development methodologies

ontology languages & logic

Classical topics for ISAO:

whats an ontology (sense? applied, formal, computational, etc.?)

Nicola Guarino

Antony Galton

Achille Varzi

Chris Welty / Dean Allemang / Tom Gruber

ontological analysis

upper ontologies / types of ontologies

mereology

time, perdurants, 3D/4D etc

ontology and conceptual modelling

ontology and natural language

ontology and the semantic web

ontology matching

ontology evaluation

ontology languages & logic

FOL and DLs

ontology development methodologies

==== Comments ====
AW: We don't need to raise something to EdC specifically - see material pasted above from last month (2 items above).

TS: Aim is to provide short videos on line.

1 topic is 'Upper ontologies / Types of ontology'; as well as 'What is an ontology?'

Also from our last notes: what does ontology articulation mean?

MB: So several of the things above feed into our focus, e.g. the kind of ontology for conceptual modeling differs from reasoning ontology differs from natural language processing ontology.

RR has some material on types of ontology - would be happy to have input from others here.

AW, MB would love to see this; TS maybe but busy.

AW working on Events and putting something into a KG on that.

AW and RR can brainstorm on this.

KB: has some work on dimensions and ontologies. From OS some years ago.

Will forward to RR.

Clarify: by Dimensions does he mean the 3D / 4D ontology styles or something else?

- Something else.

==== Previous Ontology Summits Material ====
See 2007 Ontology Summit

RR: There is a lot of great material from these earlier Summits. We should revisit those.

Are these old Summit pages all findable on the current set of pages?

Ken Baclawski: Material on kinds of ontologies from 2007: https://ken.baclawski.com/pub/2008/06/links.html

MB hunch: most TLOs seem to have 2 kinds of matter: the partitioning of the world and something about how you characterize, measure et. those things (e.g. value spaces)

RR: this also includes distinctions between data and real things as pieces of knowledge e.g. measures.

These come down to the philosophy of the way that TLO or FO approaches these things.

This is the thing MB is looking for a word for.

Let's look at the 2007 link...

KB is at COGSIMA this week - doing a workshop on interoperability of situations later this week.

TS: Clarify what that means?

KB: See draft communique. Agenda item of the Workshop.

==== SCOPE model ====
TS working on a Scope model, one aspect of which is analysis for interoperability. May also apply to orgs and their processes.

TS: Would be interested to have Hans Polzer give some feedback on this.

KB: However, HP is one of the authors of this.

RR: can TS send details about the scope thing he's talking about?

TS: This is available on the web. It needs work.

ToddSchneider: SCOPE MODEL (and related artifacts) https://www.engineeringsemantics.com/scope.html

Andrea Westerinen: SCOPE is about analyzing interop NEEDS

SCOPE - for organizational and information systems, Whether the need for a conceptual ontology emerges from this remains to be seen.

Does not mention ontology at all (either as a consequence of interoperality, OR as a thing that needs interoperating between).

TS: Recommend we look at the spreadsheet of questions and skip the model.

They are working on a v2 of this.

This is in addition to domain dependency questions .

TS: this requires a similar mindset to what you need for ontology development

Mindset for scope models and ontologies is similar.

==== Foundational ontologies ====
RR: on the UO topic: found a new Foundational Ontology, is corresponding with the developers. Called ???

RR will find the name. Planning to collect links to papers and post to the Ontolog Forum.

=== AoB ===
Ken Workshop Draft Communique Questions

RR: looking at a version of this - what's the current one? Has potential comments.

RR: There are some inaccuracies I would like to raise.

KB: This is based on what people said at the workshop, so this is not necessarily coherent and may not reflect our consensus view for example

KB: People welcome to comment.

KB to give RR the Zoom link to comment on that.

Clarify to RR how to make comments: Send these to KB.

This is the communique for Ken's workshop.

=== Next Meeting ===

First Monday of June is not a PH and that is when we will meet.

These meetings notes: MB to post those.

== Attendees ==

* Todd Schneider
* Mike Bennett
* Robert Rovetto
* Ken Baclawski
* Andrea Westerinen

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20210510

2021-05-11T16:22:00Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20210412

2021-04-28T20:02:53Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::89]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::April 12 2021 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00am PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 7:00pm BST/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at 2pm Eastern Time.

* We use GoToMeeting for these meetings - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Latest post for the IAOA website
* Ontology Articulation Guidelines
** Update from earlier (non-monthly) call
* Housekeeping
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== Ontology Articulation Guidelines ===
IAOA Education committee is pursuing some ideas for public-facing content. The current work on ontology articulation guidelines seems like something in the same vein.

Question of who IAOA define their audience to be, and outlines towards progression of material.

Do we have an outline - is this Guidelines thing intended to be a single or an evolution of artifacts.

==== EC Inclusion ====
on 1st question (EC inclusion)

TS will raise this with the EC next week.

What does TS need from this meeting to take to that?

Succinct description of what we intend to do.

At present this is not very clear.

TS we all have some notion of what should be there but there may not be a common notion.

==== Meaning of Ontology Articulation ====
What does Ontology Articulation mean?

Andrea Westerinen: So, is this about ontology purpose/audience, ontology definition/communication (is this tied to purpose and audience), specific ontology details, and then onto reuse/maintenance/...?

Andrea Westerinen: This might be our outline.

Ken returns: Agrees that this would be a good thing to bring to the EC.

Next EC meeting is Wed 21 April at 09:30 EDT

Andrea Westerinen: Purpose and nature + level (foundational, domain, application)

KB: Clarity and communication was the most important. Other features also relevant eg if you don't make clear what your purpose and intended audience are

TS: Are those points about, about ontology or the ontology articulation guidelines, or both?

KB: We should not specify all the details, but give guidance and advice.

ToddSchneider: articulation =def. the action of putting into words an idea or feeling of a specified type

AW: Would answer differently. Top level is about ontology, while ontology articulation is a piece of it. Definition / Communication was about the ontology and the communication (articulation) of that ontology e.g. OWL with no formal logic, OWL with SWRL, in CL and so on. This determines tool choices. Might not matter how to define it if you can translate to something in English e.g. a spreadsheet - that is articulation and definition so the underlying thing is less important.

ToddSchneider: articulation of what?

Options are: Articulating the content of the ontology itself, or articulating the guidelines of what an ontology should be like (styles of ontology).

TS there are two things you can articulate to: Humans or machines

KB: And communities.

So that's 3

Andrea Westerinen: Humans AND Machines

KB: The stuff MB is talking about sounds more like development guidelines. So these are two different things.

Andrea Westerinen: And different communities need different types of communications

Andrea Westerinen: They even may use different vocabularies.

KB: Ontology development guidelines seems well developed. Articulation guidelines are less so

MB and TS: The development guidelines are not so well developed, other than within specific ontology usage verticals.

MB we need to decide which we focus on first.

KB: Characterizes what MB says in terms of the guidelines for pre-development activities. Things like scope, stakeholders.

MB you would end up with different kinds of ontology as a result of that process.

TS: Those practices are already well developed.

So, is KB talking about articulating the development process, or about the sorts of ontology that drop out of applying that engineering process?

KB: The latter.

KB: this would be valuable not only to the ontology community but other communities outside of ontology?

Clarify: Suppose you had a community that was building standards for concrete, they would not have thought about an ontology as part of the solution to these requirements.

TS: If we agree with this then we are talking about articulating the procedures for ontology development and the sorts of ontologies drop out of those procedures.

KB: That presumes that you have the idea of different kinds of ontology.

Example: What kinds of distinctions are included (e.g. BFO v FIBO)

Andrea Westerinen: Isn't that the distinction between foundational vs domain?

MB: The question of differentiae already spins out into several different styles of ontology.

Context: you can have an application ontology that is in a context but the context is not explicit as part of the ontology.

KB: Is there a notion of what kinds of questions you would ask of the ontology to arrive at the style answers

Consensus: Seems there are several such questions.

Bit like requirements (but some few kinds of ontology may themselves be like requirements).

We should aim to collect a bunch of such questions.

AW has a bunch of different experiences that could be put into such a list.

AW: Do we start with the experiences and then come up with the questions, or do we start asking questions in high level terms, or meeting in the middle?

Some of the questions would be included in the development lifecycle stuff

Do we also want to develop questions that would lead to the use of different TLOs (or no TLO) and / or different ontological commitments (Realism, 4D etc.)

Andrea Westerinen: Analysis may be driven by more concrete questions ... Like "systems thinking"

TS What about things that might lead to using some of those as an analytical tool whether or not the resulting work also conforms to these.

Have seen certain TLOs cause problems even in the analysis, if they are not well matched to what they are trying to do.

Have seen issues with the intended semantics of some of the concepts in some TLOs.

Should not need to go into the notion of Occurrent to use the notion.

People can get lost about what their goal is.

Andrea Westerinen: What is your timeframe? What is your 'system'? What are its boundaries? What depth do you need to go to?

MB: There are no wrong answers, just missing questions.

Some people are not well suited to ontology.

MB this is a distinct skill set, just like being able to play a musical instrument. Some IT folks may happen to be good at it, others may not.

AW: Distinguishing Continuant v Occurrent may be a matter of time scales. Need to understand the system, domain, scope (boundaries).

That also bring you to the questions of Realism, to whether there are absolute truths.

Meaning is not Truth.

e.g. in science there are accepted true assertions.

ToddSchneider: Can we not use the term 'meaning', but instead use 'interpretation'?

AW: Some of the TLOs e.g. Realism are better suited to the core of science (realism = truth of what things mean and how things relate to things). Other domains e.g. military, are not able to use that since I have to track who thought what, for which a Realist ontology like BFO would be very problematic. See e.g. World Modelers - minimal ontology (people, cause etc.) at top level, and bottom level is scientific models with no ontology. Trying to bring together things that papers say and things that can be combined in a scientific model. Applying to understanding poverty in Ethiopia. Failing as they do not have the right ontology and no-one needs the scientific models for Ethiopia.

Ken Baclawski: @[14:45] There is a saying about this problem. "To a person with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." A person who has made a psychological commitment to a particular tool will change the problem to suit their tool rather than the other way around.

So this is a good example of not asking the right questions that will have resulted in the right kind of ontology.

RR: Computational ontology versus conceptual ontologies, are an important distinction. Defines 'What are your goals' e.g. do something useful with data versus those who need detailed philosophical accounts of things.

e.g. in science there is no single convergence on truth, so even there, a given realist ontology might be a good fit.

Science would not assume a given metaphysical view of the world.

Need to articulate Realism v Conceptualism.

Any given ontology will consider itself Realist or Conceptualist. It would not be helpful to say that e.g. BFO is about science.

Notions of Continuant v Occurrent also pre-date the current TLOs. These are metaphysically posted entities.

It is not natural to focus on those terms - as defined in a given TLO. There is more baggage associated with those things. There are other e.g. hybrid ways of representing those notions.

ToddSchneider: Temporal aspects of an entity are important to know to understand what needs to be represented.

Andrea Westerinen: If we word the questions without using philosophy terms, then that would be more palatable.

MB we need ontologists to understand philosophy in order not to make philosophical mistakes.

Andrea Westerinen: @Todd +1

Andrea Westerinen: @Mike We need to word the questions so that they are understandable across vocabularies and not using specific vocab choices of existing TLOs.

=== Journal of Applied Ontology ===
Ken Baclawski: This is off-topic, but could be considered AOB for some of us. The Journal of Applied Ontology has just sent me the proof for the Communique on knowledge graphs. While I am responsible for proof-reading, is anyone interested in contributing to this?

Andrea Westerinen: @Ken Contributing how?

Proof reading (parts)

Errors or expanding? Just errors.

Action: Mail Ken if you are interested in proof reading for potential errors.

=== Next meeting: ===
==== Agenda ====
Start to compile some questions via email.

Do we have a post for EC?

Report that to the EC. Report that this is what we are doing.

Can set up a Google Doc? or DropBox

TS can't access Google Docs.

Use an email list OR the SWAO email server

Which?

Just the 5 people who are here.

Each person come up with their list then compile list.

==== Date ====
MB to confirm if next meeting is the 1st Mon in May or if that is a public holiday.

== Attendees ==

* Todd Schneider
* Ken Baclawski
* Andrea Westerinen
* Robert Rovetto
* Mike Bennett

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20210510

2021-04-28T19:49:45Z

MikeHypercube: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10" |- ! scope="row" | Number | sequence::90 |- ! scope="row" | Duration | duration:..."

SWAO:Conference Call 20210412

2021-04-05T17:56:04Z

MikeHypercube: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10" |- ! scope="row" | Number | sequence::89 |- ! scope="row" | Duration | duration:..."

SWAO:Conference Call 20210315

2021-03-08T23:29:12Z

MikeHypercube: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10" |- ! scope="row" | Number | sequence::88 |- ! scope="row" | Duration | duration:..."

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::88]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::March 15 2021 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00am PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 6:00pm GMT/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

'' Special Meeting: Events ontology ''

This a one-off session not a Monthly Meeting

* We will use the same GoToMeeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Events Ontology Discussion

== Proceedings ==

== Attendees ==

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20210301

2021-03-08T23:24:58Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::87]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::March 01 2021 19:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00am PST/2:00pm EST
|-
| 7:00pm GMT/8:00pm CET
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at 2pm Eastern Time.

* We use GoToMeeting for these meetings - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Latest post for the IAOA website
* Ontology Articulation Guidelines
** Presentation: Andrea Westerinen on Events ontology
** Presentation: Mike Bennett on Ontology Styles and TLO usage
* Housekeeping
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== Blog post: ===
No new blog post yet this month - awaiting closure on these issues (today's meeting)

This is on the discussion about TLOs

=== Presentation: Andrea ===

Slides also related to IoF discussion last week on event and process etc.

Trips ontology (from Rochester)

Andrea Westerinen: https://www.cs.rochester.edu/research/trips/lexicon/browse-ont-lex.html

==== Questions ====

In the notion of Event, is there a Subject?

There is an Agent. Need not be a Subject (e.g. climate event in Ethiopia). There are agents who cause / experience things.

TS: Subject = what the Event is about

AW: That is sometimes called the Theme. What the event is about it the event itself (hurricane, meeting eetc.) so it stands alone per Davidson view in linguistic theory of events. Has arguments, things people do or are done to them etc.

TS: Many people would use the word Subject for those e.g. subect = some meeting.

AW: That is the Happening, Occurrence or State (the 'What is this about?')

Versus Subject Predicate Object (where the Event is the Subject in a triple)

AW: approaching it in terms of the way people think

Whys: Goal etc v Causation (2 kinds of Why)

ToddSchneider: A web drawing tool, https://excalidraw.com

Andrea Westerinen: http://www.linguist.org/History-of-Events.pdf

Vendler 1967 (above)

Deals with the refinements of kinds of Event based on the presence of otherwise of the various properties in Andrea's slide.

Also reflected in DOLCE

Using RDF* to do probabilistic analysis or reasoning

Eventuality covers both Event and State (also in that paper) i.e. Stative and Eventive

Also looking at VerbNet (from Colorado) - we should look at that.

https://verbs.colorado.edu/verbnet/

If Failure in there? AW has a model based on this, took Failure out, also has Success etc.

What is the relationship between Event and Observation?

- using measurement as an event

TS: What is the truth maker for Event?

e.g Agent

Ascribe probability to that agent?

- you ascribe provenance to the information about the event.

Uses booleans for things like if an event is planned etc.

Robert rovetto: Some additional concepts on events are (a) event calculus,(b) simple event model, (c) concepts by Galton and Mizoguchi, (d) an unpublished 2012 paper in a univ workshop on events I wrote attempting a taxonomy of events

Is a process the same as an Event?

No - process is a sequence of events.

KB: Events can have a complex structure e.g. Ontology Summit v Summit Session

So you have a mereology

KB: That makes it difficult to talk about hasTime for a thing

AW: Not at all - the Summit (complex event) has a start and end, the sessions have their own times.

KB: the meanings of the times in those 2 cases are quite different.

AW: The collection of meetings has its own time

Robert rovetto: (e) there’s also I think a recurrent event ontology design pattern

ToddSchneider: If a 'process' is a sequence of 'Events', is a single 'Event' a 'Process'?

The boolean (property of owl:thing) covers the distinctions like, planned, future, possibility etc. as well as generic for punning

AW not keen to introduce sub classes corresponding to these as it affects future modeling possibilities.

TS: Process v Event

Process as a sequence of events?

AW: or States

TS: If I have a single event is that a process?

AW: No.

Process has a start and end (sub properties of Process) + well-defined steps

Also things that are not process, such as a riot, or global warming

MB: the word Process may refer to several things, one of which is our notion of business process. Global warming is a kind of process but it is not a kind of one of those.

TS: There is a more general concept of which Natural Process and Business Process would be a kind.

MB: Nice to find common abstractions, but did not want to assume that every use of a word will necessarily point to a common concept.

See Oxford US English definition

has several distinct definitions.

Business process ('Process') has goal, end point etc.

Commonality - some change is happening

MB: Maybe Process is how a change happens

A Sequence of Events can be a natural process too.

RR: Would not limit Business Processes to those having Goals. Would not say that those processes that have goals are business processes. Non human processes also have a teleological element. Have artificial events and processes.

MB: Unpack teleology between conscious (agent with a goal) versus more broadly function driven

RR: The literature backs up that (latter) use of these terms.

AW: Sequencing: there is a hasNext

Slides can be shared with the IoF?

Yes- AW will clean them up.

How would this approach play into the IoF commitment to BFO?

TS: It provides another perspective to the participants.

Many of them are not familiar with DOLCE or the options that exist in TLO.

KB: What is the intention behind this Event ontology?

AW: Using for narrative analysis. Trying to put together how people think about cause and effect and how they explain their lives in terms of narrative events.

Would you ever use this beyond that?

AW has used this same ontology in 2 different programs, in causal explanations and in logistics work. Has helped focus the ontology on particular problems.

KB has worked on such programs also (and logistics) and would see this Event ontology as being helpful.

KB: Are you looking to make this a standard?

AW: Not really; just putting out ideas. Resonates with non-ontologists. Talking with SMEs, others.

KB Would be nice if this could be re-used

AW: Happy to support reuse of this.

AW will write some papers on this ontology, but also describe what you can do with it - not simply an intellectual exercise.

KB: The database community is also interested in events.

AW happy to take this anywhere.

Deals with the verbs side of the world, having previously focused on the nouns side of things. e.g. shipping, ordering, maintenance events. Lets you think about who is participating, what gets done etc.

=== AoB ===
Who will write the blog post?

Are we ready to write one yet?

AW would like to take some of today's feedback (e.g. Todd o change, Robert's points) and revise the slides.

KB: Post can simply say you are working on something.

RR would love to brainstorm more on events

MB: Maybe we should continue with the Events conversation (e.g. MB can do a counter-proposed Events conceptual ontology) for this thread of thinking; may help frame our thoughts on TLO more generally.

TS: How well can these things be merged with BFO and if not, why?

TS It would be interesting to understand how this approach to Event might conflict with BFO (for IoF).

RR would encourage looking at Galton and Mizoguchi’s approach to events also - Event Calculus

AW has worked with the Event Calculus

=== Next call: ===

Propose a call in 2 weeks to continue this discussion

All seem to think this is a good idea.

Can we invite one or two others who would be able to contribute to this conversation

For example some of the IoF folks.

Next call: 2 weeks time, invite selectively, keep it small. Agenda is specifically Events. Also make people aware of other TLOs.

Also talk bot DOLCE, gUFO etc. on this.

MB: to arrange this in 2 weeks. 15 March Same time same dial-ins.

14:00 EDT (not EST – clocks will have changed in North America)

These meetings are pinned to US prevailing time.

== Attendees ==

* Mike Bennett
* Ken Baclawski
* Andrea Westerinen
* Todd Schneider
* Robert Rovetto

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20210301

2021-03-01T18:04:41Z

MikeHypercube: /* Agenda */

SWAO:Conference Call 20210201

2021-02-27T01:10:02Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::86]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::February 01 2021 19:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00am PST/2:00pm EST
|-
| 7:00pm GMT/8:00pm CET
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at 2pm Eastern Time.

* We use GoToMeeting for these meetings - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Latest post for the IAOA website
* Ontology Articulation Guidelines
** Brief introductory comments
** Free-form Discussion
* Housekeeping
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== IAOA Website Post ===
Latest post for the IAOA website

See iaoa.org

https://iaoa.org/index.php/2021/01/11/january-swao-monthly-report/

Do we need to make any changes to this?

No

=== Ontology Articulation Guidelines ===
TS: What do we have in mind by 'articulation'?

ToddSchneider: Events cause change??

End result (for something put on wiki) versus what we said we would do today to work toward that result.

ToddSchneider: Articulation =def. the action of putting into words an idea or feeling of a specified type

End result is some kind of 'Guidelines'

Do we agree on what we mean by 'guidelines' e.g. for ontology development or for something else?

e.g. best practices?

But if best practices, then for what purpose

e.g. use, development, evolution etc.

See also the ongoing thread on the Ontolog Forum on ontology development methods, with references to various papers ad methodologies

Also there's the 2013 Ontology Summit on a related topic.

That was Ontology Evaluation across the Ontology Lifecycle.

TS: Has everyone looked at the survey that Gary sent around on the 'sweet' things. That might be a starting point to look at some of the aspects.

Where: Ontolog Forum. Recently - see around 29 Jan.

This as specific to the Sweet ontology (formerly NASA)

This is on BioPortal but with its own GitHub site.

Andrea Westerinen: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdH48fAZ1iQePvcHT5Wj2zLfkamNt5sHVqaDR76pqK8q7k9XA/viewform

This lists a bunch of criteria that might be useful for framing or an outline for this thing we want to articulate about guidelines, or ontology development, or evaluation. Includes obvious ones like whether you have basic language definitions.

TS: Ontologies can be used as a kind of interface between machines and humans.

The first list of questions on the SWEET survey is not really 'semantic resources' but potential purposes of a semantic resource. Some of the given answers are not even that, e.g. provenance.

May also be conflating different parts of the lifecycle. So it is a bit of a grab bag.

Has several aspects that might be useful to this conversation.

In particular the focus on 'semantics resources' in general.

Natural language definitions versus 'multi language support' as a feature of some resource.

TS: in terms of Human Machine interface: how you understand the symbols coming out of the computer.

AW: Meanwhile the SWEET thing is beyond multi-language, covering also multi vocabulary.

If an ontology is going to be used by people whose natural language is not English, it may be helpful to have equivalent definitions that are not English.

There is a distinction here, as to whether the different languages are provided because it is the end goal of the deliverable, versus when the definition is intended as documentation of an ontology as an application.

Andrea Westerinen: Translation versus localisation

Though it is sometimes difficult to draw the limits between translation and localisation, in general localisation addresses significant, non-textual components of products or services. In addition to translation (and, therefore, grammar and spelling issues that vary from place to place where the same language is spoken), the localisation process might include adapting graphics; adopting local currencies; using proper format for date and time, addresses, and phone numbers applicable to the location; the choices of colours; cultural references; and many other details, including rethinking the physical structure of a product. All these changes aim to recognise local sensitivities, avoid conflict with local culture, customs, common habits, and enter the local market by merging into its needs and desires. For example, localisation aims to offer country-specific websites of the same company or different editions of a book depending on where it is published. It must be kept in mind that a political entity such as a country is not the same as a language or culture; even in countries where there exists a substantially identical relationship between a language and a political entity, there are almost certainly multiple cultures and multiple minority languages even if the minority languages are spoken by transient populations. For instance, Japan's national language is Japanese and is the primary language for over 99% of the population, but the country also recognises 11 languages officially, others are spoken by transient populations, and others are spoken as second or other languages.

Is it the case that an NL definition is the same for both scenarios?

This seems like an important question, whether or not we figured out the answer yet.

The above quote is from Wikipedia.

The distinction between translation and localization is relevant to the above topic. Localization is about how you localize the application for SemWeb applications.

MB has slides - will provide a shorter version for this topic

AW can post an article on the use of upper ontologies and whether they help with harmonizing ontologies.

See also Track A Claudio Mozello presentation.

There are still differences in view on the usability of TLOs

Ontological Stance.

Also the question of how they would be used.

The paper mentioned above is a survey so it will help us see what the prevalence of views is on that.

This will also have implications based on the development methods.

Ken Baclawski: What do you think of CEDAR (https://metadatacenter.org/)?

ToddSchneider: Haven't heard of 'CEDAR'.

The SWEET Ontology (or the SWEET files, however we happen to characterize them) refers to CEDAR.

SWEET has a lot of IRIs but but no definition.

That relies on the user relying on their intended definition of the NL terms.

There are recommendations in CEDAR of how you format the IRI.

ToddSchneider: Have to go.

AW: That's like saying you can name something and the name never changes. You never want to pick a name and say for all time that that's the name of something.

Andrea Westerinen: Exactly, my name changed several times with different marriages.

Andrea Westerinen: For hardware, is your computer named by the external asset tag? The computer processors? The serial number on the motherboard?

Andrea Westerinen: Digital twin?

Andrea Westerinen: Archetypes?

Andrea Westerinen: I would talk about "possible worlds"

Absolutely!

Possible worlds: What people care about is future, or possible world you are describing given the data you have

Andrea Westerinen: Possible worlds can be based on evidence, interpretation, the future and its scenarios, ...

What about designs? risks? Some of these fall foul of Realism but that may depend on how Realism is framed so there may be variants on that.

So Realism v Conceptualism needs to be talked about in any conversation about TLOs - you can't just accept or reject TLO without that conversation.

=== Ontology Summit discussion ===

Would like to see some more original insights in some of the Summit presentations.

TLOs are a key part of this conversation

AW wants to talk about the 6Ws - has some slides for this (for the Summit).

=== AoB ===
None.

=== Next Meeting ===
AW Can do deeper extension of those slides for this session next month.

MB will do the same.

Next meeting 01 March (TBC)

If not, will be the 8th. TBC

== Attendees ==

* ToddSchneider
* Ken Baclawski
* Andrea R. Westerinen (Bbn)
* Mike Bennett

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20210301

2021-02-27T00:58:11Z

MikeHypercube: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10" |- ! scope="row" | Number | sequence::87 |- ! scope="row" | Duration | duration:..."

SWAO:Conference Call 20210201

2021-02-01T17:11:28Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20210201

2021-02-01T16:43:38Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20210201

2021-01-29T21:03:51Z

MikeHypercube: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10" |- ! scope="row" | Number | sequence::86 |- ! scope="row" | Duration | duration:..."

SWAO:Conference Call 20210111

2021-01-29T21:02:02Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::85]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::January 11 2021 19:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00am PST/2:00pm EST
|-
| 7:00pm GMT/8:00pm CET
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at 2pm Eastern Time.

* We use GoToMeeting for these meetings - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Writing a post for the IAOA website
* Ontology Articulation Guidelines
** New activity focusing on best practice for the semantics aspects of ontology development
** Next steps
* Housekeeping
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== Blog post ===

We did not meet in December. IAOA site shows November so this is up to date.

Exec Council also not met for while.

Do we need to do one for January?

Ken Baclawski: The next IAOA EC meeting is tomorrow.

==== Ontology Summit Tracks of Relevance ====

There is a track on the Summit that may be convergent with this agenda:

The Landscape one

Definitions also a relevant track

Also Neurosymbolic Learning ontologies

Also Organizations

ToddSchneider: Different types of ontologies have different uses and require different techniques. Some major types include: foundational, reference, domain, and application ontologies. The different types overlap. This track will survey the landscape of ontology types and propose guidelines on how to identify the type of an ontology and how to use it.

On the Summit - expect to survey things rather than have speakers go into detail.

TS is one of the speakers - will make some points.

Looking for speakers on this

MB happy to share the ontology style visual that the Semantic Shed are developing.

TS: Emphasis of the track is on the aspect of communication.

Then different needs for communication will require different things

i.e. 'Why do you want to build an ontology' - most of the answers relate to communication.

TS can send the draft outline.

We are about articulating the distinctions; summit track is focused on what is actually out there - what people are doing, research etc.

Also to contrast the European (Trento etc.) v American (BFO v everyone else).

==== For the Blog ====

So, do we want to put anything about the Summit Track in the January update?

Do have anything else to put in the update?

AW: Can put that we are paying close attention to the Ontology Summit and taking ideas and discussion points from that.

All agree. Would enable us to talk about the Summit in our post and how it relates to SWAO

Note that the November blog also mentions vocabulary - so we could mention that track also.

==== IAOA Dictionary ====

It is hard to find the IAOA dictionary e.g. via Resources, where we have been trying to look.

Apparently it's on the wiki pages (whether or not there's a link we didn't find yet)

There is a link:

https://wiki.iaoa.org/index.php/Edu:Term_List

Link via Education committee Wiki

BUT

only if you already know

(a) that there is a vicabulary to find on the wiki

(b) that it is called Terms List

In order to query things semantically you would need to have a SKOS vocabulary and SPARQL queries against that.

There is no native way of searching for things by meaning on the Internet (as brains do)

==== Relevant Topics for the Blog ====

TS: OWA v FOL

Tarski and truthmakers

FDIC

KB: Issue in Summit discussions on the Organizations track: we speak of an ecosystem of ontologies. What about Sustainability of such an ecosystem?

Also (just now) from TS: what about the maintenance of data surrogates for truth makers (e.g. banking license).

KS: Sustaining here is not the same as maintainability.

i.e. what community is involved in sustaining the thing.

TS i.e. who is going to pay for it?

(including time as well as $$)

(can we put anything about any of the above discussion in the Monthly blog update?)

MB to add notes on the Truthmaker stuff (spoke earlier but did not write it down)

Also check Stanford Enc of Philosophy.

Stamford - there is one in CT and one in Lincolnshire

ToddSchneider: Have to go.

=== Ontology Summit ===

Summit - can we get more of us involved/

AW: Yes. Will also review Todd's slides and comment.

=== SWAO Topics Dialog ===

Get some dialog going

Can we get that dialog going on the wiki structure somewhere?

AW: Better to put conclusions on the wiki. People already confused enough about ontology and truth and so on. Dialog between us is too advanced and confusing for many of our prospective readers.

e.g. the value of upper ontologies - when it comes to making something useful for an application (e.g. for a DARPA project); using the ontology to nail the semantics, relationships, connections between entities and concepts that we can populate with data. Whether or not we have the data or have it yet (or can infer it). What are the concepts and how they relate to solving a given problem.

AW has some material on this, based on how the ontology is defined. Based on competency questions and what other microservices need, to convey the information that's needed. Conceptual basis, then look at whether you have the data. UOs do nothing to help that problem.

People want to know how to make an ontology accessible to developers and to the business people when you are talking philosophy.

AW: Approach to ontology development to be about events. Events cause change. Eventualities (in linguistic event theory): an Event is a Thing. States exist. States have holders. Can be long- or short-running.

AW: e.g. people start with 'what are the nouns versus 'what are the events?' Events more tractable (less infinite). People interested in talking more about these issues.

AW: Recommend a general systems thinking approach (rather than a philosophy approach). This constrains the scope.

The question is whether in ontology we need to take account of the conclusions coming out of academia, the way you would in any other engineering discipline.

e.g. extract the things of relevance to the intended scope e.g. Who What When Where How. Makes a simple UO.

MB: Andrea is doing exactly what I describe as the role of Engineer, in understanding the academic stuff so that the IT people did not need to.

==== Outcomes ====

We could do a presentation-led discussion of these issues on one of these sessions (e.g. 5 min from each perspective) on the above and other issues.

Agree that we should not put this on a wiki

Take discussions to email / next meeting and aim to have wiki page with outputs.

Outputs need not be one monolithic view of the word, but a summary of the schools of thought, methods, tools and techniques that different people use and recommend, as well as the overlap and underlap.

So e.g. to highlight where UO or ODP are valuable. Also reuse - not black and white but at what level you reuse a thing.

=== Conclusions ===

Enough for blog post for this month

Agenda for next month to talk through the stuff above

MB and AW to present (5 min)

any anyone else who is able to

Top down v bottom up, whether you need TLO v ODPs, reuse challenges.

AW: Need a more real world way to think about concepts.

e.g. you still have the WWWWWs (including Why). People use stories to explain why they think something happened. Hence causal analysis so you can pull the Why out. Subject to defeasible logic.

==== Aside: Linguistic order of Adjectives in English ====

Ken Baclawski: FWIW, here is a classification of adjectives in English: order

Order; relating to; examples

1; opinion; unusual, lovely, beautiful

2; size; big, small, tall

3; physical quality; thin, rough, untidy

4; shape; round, square, rectangular

5; age; young, old, youthful

6; colour; blue, red, pink

7; origin; Dutch, Japanese, Turkish

8; material; metal, wood, plastic

9; type; general-purpose, four-sided, U-shaped

10; purpose; cleaning, hammering, cooking

Ken Baclawski: Sorry, that copy-paste added a lot of newlines.

(cleaned up in the edit)

Ken Baclawski: Here they are again:

* opinion
* size
* physical quality
* shape
* age
* colour
* origin
* material
* type
* purpose

=== Next meeting: ===

1 Feb.

All good

1 Mar not so good (talk about on next month's call)

== Attendees ==

* Mike Bennett
* Todd Schneider
* Ken Baclawski
* Andrea Westerinen

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20201102

2021-01-04T17:23:50Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::83]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::November 2 2020 19:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00am PST/2:00pm EST
|-
| 7:00pm GMT/8:00pm CET
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at 2pm Eastern Time.

* We use GoToMeeting for these meetings - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Writing a post for the IAOA website
* Ontology Articulation Guidelines
** New activity focusing on best practice for the semantics aspects of ontology development
** Next steps
* Housekeeping
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== Post for IAOA Website ===

This should be a standing agenda item each month

They want something from us each month.

See iaoa.org for examples

They are gently reminding us they would like to see something every month. We did one a few months ago.

There is a set of articles at lower left - it only shows the most recent so our last one has been bumped off.

==== What do we need to write? ====

Just a few lines.

Would have a link to web page? Yes

What page" The meeting page? Or the general wiki page for this SIG that all the meeting pages are linked off from.

So that is the link that will go there.

What do we want to write?

What we've done recently? Ontology Articulation Guidelines.

===== Terminology =====

ToddSchneider: Articulate - express (an idea or feeling) fluently and coherently

TS: Do we want to call it that? Articulation has a linguistic meaning and a more common meaning of articulate (see below)

MB and KB feel this is the right notion.

MB: is about articulating the distinctions among ontology, as a pre-requisite to e.g. having design guidelines for the relevant kinds of ontology. hence why we did not want to call it simply Ontology Design Guidelines.

===== What did we write last time? =====

KenBaclawski:
The Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) Special Interest Group will be embarking on a new project to develop a guide for ontology development. Though there are existing guides to ontology development we feel there are gaps in the level of detail of ontological analysis. The intent of this project is to create a guide that will be easy enough to use, but still provide a greater measure of analysis. The goal is to provide more robust ontologies.

So the focus of the earlier description was more about enriching ontology development (design) guidelines, in contrast to what we are saying today.

So we could add something on this, to show some progress maybe?

===== Other relevant things for the Post: =====

See latest post from John Sowa on something in itself versus something in a role - important points

TS: This is relevant for this ontology development paradigm.

The IOF had an interesting conversation on that last week, where we learned how BFO approaches those kinds of problem.

ToddSchneider: From John Sowa's email of 31 Oct. 2020:
Basic principle: before classifying any term in an ontology, always ask how it is used.

Advice: Always keep a good dictionary handy when you're doing ontology. Professional lexicographers write them. I have far more confidence in professional lexicographers than in amateur ontologists.

In fact, when it comes to evaluating definitions, I have more confidence in those written by professional lexicographers than I do in most of those by professional philosophers. I have collaborated with members of both professions.

===== Specialized Terminology Usage =====

At IOF there was a discussion of the use of words in BFO that did not map to the usual human understanding of these things.

Similarly you would learn words like 'Mixin' to understand OntoUML.

KB to earlier agenda point the meaning of 'multi'.

=== Ontology Articulation Considerations ===

==== IOF ====
IOF use of BFO as the Foundational ontology for IOF. The understanding was that there were some issues with BFO and that if those issues became an impediment we would go to a 'Plan B'

===== IOF Plan B =====

Was there a specific plan for Plan B?

RR had recommended Guarino, Guizzardi and others to join that effort, which did not happen. Was this Plan B? Would have been a more neutral and fair Plan B.

BFO has known issues, e.g. being unable to represent an electromagnetic field, energy, quantities and so on.

Would encourage this group to do something to help with these matters.

Is this something this group should add to its agenda?

RR recommends that as part of IAOA we should pursue this, to ensure fairness for all.

This SIG deals with cross-disciplinary matters i.e. Semantic Web versus Applied Ontology. Is this within our remit?

KB, TS agree this would be appropriate. We are attempting to influence different communities.

==== Ontology distinctions ====

TS: Relevant to the guidelines (our main agenda today). One thing we might help with is providing distinctions, characterization, assumptions they were created with. e.g. DOLCE cognitive bias, BFO Realist commitment and so on. Both BFO and DOLCE are very explicit about those. UFO it's less clear (MB can look into that). What others?

==== Others ====

* GFO
* SUMO

Should we mention SUMO?

MB we should try to characterize SUMO whether we like it or not - it's not about approving or not, but about characterizing.

TS: The Semantic Web gang are looking to engineer artifacts and need to understand these distinctions.

So we need to be able to describe the characterization so that SemWeb people can consume that information and its implications.

RR: Different communities may create their own foundational ontologies - there are many efforts out there. These may or may not conform to the kinds of characterization we are talking about.

So e.g. the IOF Plan B - given the dominance of BFO in this, neutrality is important so that this (and any TLO) does not become the de facto standard for an entire industry.

So the IAOA should take a role in resisting / preventing such imbalance, and make users aware they can create their own TLO.

RR: People interested in ontology should be able to create their own UO without reference to the philosophy

MB: people " " " should be able to create their own UO AND understand the philosophical commitment; they might or might not make philosophical commitments.

So some things might say they are Realist (in a specific way of using that term) and need to define that in terms of philosophy.

RR Example: category of 'mind' could be rejected or mischaracterized in a Realist ontology (or some kind of Realist ontology). Even within Realism, need to further characterize e.g. of what is it Realist (what do you accept or know to be Real). So there are different types of Realist stance.

So there is a decision tree of things people need to know about for different stances (such as Realism) that they elect to follow.

So Realism is not a single over-riding kind.

Realism - various theories may be realist or anti-realist towards specific matter.

So which Realist stance applies to BFO itself?

RR: The broader consideration is, for a given set of things in the domain, what are the implications of using this or that TLO/UO.

TS: If you are going to conform to some FO, there are some contortions you have to make, to make that thing work.

RR: For most people, should be able to do their own without having to fit within one of the existing ones.

==== Foundational Ontology ====

TS: What value does the use of a FO provide?

e.g. one feature of Semantic Web is that they reject that anyway, and create their works for particular uses willy nilly, not looking at specific reuse or extensibility.

TS implies 2 points in the description of SemWeb:

1. The local use case / usage context

2. The time focus - have something immediate for an application but not necessarily maintainable

(which is an issue with software dev generally)

Understanding the role of use cases is another of the things on our roadmap

Conceptual modeling v OWL - there are not really any good tools other than OWL and yet OWL is the wrong tool for that.

Same with UML representations of ontologies.

Our understanding of what it means to be an ontology...

==== Wrap this up: ====

1. What needs to be written for the IAOA

2. Also today's notes provide a good jump-off point for sorting out the different dimensions of the problem of describing different kinds of thing that are an ontology. This our main current research topic.

3. We should then be able to take the outcome of these conversations, and feed them (somehow) into things like ISO, IOF, other industry efforts.

(MB: whether you are using an UO versus whether you are using a published UO like BFO or DOLCE)

==== Further Discussion on Foundational, Upper etc. ontologies ====

Common Misconceptions - e.g. when and whether you need to use an UO; also how you use it.

Likewise for Foundational and TLO / UO.

Lots to unpack there for another time.

Also what we mean by Foundational, Top level, Upper.

Also the architecture of the ontology framework, whether it has Foundational and so on. Versus e.g. Generic ontology. Implication of a particular architecture by the use of some of these words.

Separately, architecture may refer to the architecture of ontologIES plural, i.e. how you fit together a coherent set of Ontologies across a broad space

There is a range of architectural considerations.

=== Outcomes (redux) ===

1. The post for today's update

- to be sent to the 4 of us to look over

2. Start to put a wiki page together (MB, under Projects)

Notes in the report in (1) that we are now doing this

and (3) once we have some material in that page we can start to link to it in order to influence conversations elsewhere.

On (3) we can also write a paper once this conversation is further along.

== Attendees ==

* Robert Rovetto
* Mike Bennett
* Ken Baclawski
* Todd Schneider

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20210111

2021-01-04T17:11:37Z

MikeHypercube: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10" |- ! scope="row" | Number | sequence::85 |- ! scope="row" | Duration | duration:..."

SWAO:Conference Call 20201207

2021-01-04T17:09:38Z

MikeHypercube: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10" |- ! scope="row" | Number | sequence::84 |- ! scope="row" | Duration | duration:..."

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::84]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::December 7 2020 19:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00am PST/2:00pm EST
|-
| 7:00pm GMT/8:00pm CET
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

There was NO MEETING for December, due to unavailability of key personnel.

The next meeting will be on 11 January.

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at 2pm Eastern Time.

* We use GoToMeeting for these meetings - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

== Proceedings ==

Via email correspondence, we agreed that the next meeting will be held on January 11th 2021.

== Attendees ==

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20201102

2020-11-02T17:16:19Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20201102

2020-11-02T16:44:03Z

MikeHypercube: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10" |- ! scope="row" | Number | sequence::83 |- ! scope="row" | Duration | duration:..."

SWAO:Conference Call 20201005

2020-10-05T19:47:22Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::82]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::October 5 2020 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00am PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 7:00pm BST/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at 2pm Eastern Time.

* We use GoToMeeting for these meetings - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Ontology Articulation Guidelines
** New activity focusing on best practice for the semantics aspects of ontology development
** Next steps
* Housekeeping
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

Confirm meeting time: remains as 2pm going forward.

Ontology Articulation Guidelines

See Ontolog Forum threads at present on ontology where Ed Berkmeyer, John Sowa on recognizing different kinds of ontology for different purposes

Has anyone mentioned 'engineering artifacts'?

Yes, someone did.

ToddSchneider: Mike, your audio transmission continues to break.

MB there are ontologies that are developed for an engineering solution purpose, and ontologies that are developed as concept models

These each have a purpose, but for concept models, but not necessarily an end application purpose.

Do we all subscribe to the premise that there are ontologies for applications (e.g. Semantic Web) and ontologies for reference (concept ontologies) and that these are each valid and valuable?

It follows that there are different guideliens for how to create one or the other of these.

KB: We need to be able to articulate the purpose.

Also we need guidelines for how we articulate the different kinds of purpose.

Are we presuming a common definition for what an ontology is.

MB: Yes, see Gruber.

An ontology is a formal specification of a conceptualization.

MB likes this because it is broad enough that the kinds of ontology we are trying to distinguish between, are all included within this definition.

KB dislikes it as it uses words that are themselves vague.

KB: JFS would would say that an ontology is a FOL theory, which misses the point, since theory does not necessarily have a connection to anything else.

KB you need to connect the words (or symbols? MB) to the things they are about. The words are the ontology.

TS: An ontology does nto need to be in FOL, you can use natural language.

TZ: The whole idea is to communicate something.

TS mentions the use of natural language.

TS has a problem with Gruber notion of Conceptualization.

KB sees people parroting that definition in papers all the time. But then they don't seem to use it again.

KB the Gruber definition wold also cover any computer program.

MB: a program has an ontology but is it not an ontology.

So the definition admits to some things that we would not admit as ontologies.

TS: how would that example compare with formalisms that accept of more than one interpretation.

Can we use Gruber and acknowledge that there are potential issues with it.

MB the notion of ontology is (a) it has aboutness where that aboutness is of things in the world, and has some formalism that does not admit of multiple interpretations.

KB: that works in that it rules out the interpretation of this as including computer programs.

It also constrains you to one interpretation.

TS correction; not that it constrains you to one interpretation, but that it constrains interpretations.

See Nicola Guarino slides on that.

MB would include higher orders of logic, mathematics also as formalisms in which you can make the formal specification of a conceptualization - would include that in ontology

all agree

Context?

We had a summit on that.

ToddSchneider: Vocabulary :: the body of words used in a particular language

ToddSchneider: But the interpretations of the 'words' in a vocabulary are left open.

MB: in terminology (AKA vocabulary in some senses), Word W refers to concept C in context X.

Meaning of a word is contextual.

https://wiki.iaoa.org/index.php/Edu:Ontology

Todd has a diagram showing the spectrum of ontologies.

the page at https://wiki.iaoa.org/index.php/Edu:Term_List includes kinds of ontology.

THe ontolgoy definition page defines ontology as a count noun (correct) but definitions (1) and (2) are not of the count noun itself at all.

ToddSchneider: Ontologies by form or by function

ToddSchneider: Formalism vs. Aboutness

Todd's diagram was created in response to the very question we are addressing in this SIG so it's our first deliverable.

What else do we need to say about the distinctions between these?

TS: This is also based on Tarski model theory.

TS: There are issues with natural language since there can be ambiguity in how words are used.

Oxford English Dictionary has a new thing called Lexico that gives a partial view, for free. You don't get to see the history of the word.

Actions:

We can do a set of wiki pages on our site.

We can use the terms in the Edu term list as a starting pi=oint for our structure.

We will not be using Leo's well-known diagram for a number of reasons. We should review it howeever since it is well referenced, and to see what in that is useful for us in articulating the things we need to articulate.

MB we need to articulate the distinctions between these things before we can articulate guidelines for how one would develop these things. That's why our work is broader than simply 'Guidelines'.

Next: think about formalisms, next time. If we can't define it, at least give many examples.

ToddSchneider: Formalism :: give (something) a definite structure or shape

Next Meeting 2 November, 2pm

== Attendees ==

* MikeBennett
* ToddSchneider
* KenBaclawski

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20201005

2020-10-05T19:15:24Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::82]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::October 5 2020 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00am PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 7:00pm BST/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at 2pm Eastern Time.

* We use GoToMeeting for these meetings - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Ontology Articulation Guidelines
** New activity focusing on best practice for the semantics aspects of ontology development
** Next steps
* Housekeeping
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

Confirm meeting time: remains as 2pm going forward.

Ontology Articulation Guidelines

See Ontolog Forum threads at present on ontology where Ed Berkmeyer, John Sowa on recognizing different kinds of ontology for different purposes

Has anyone mentioned 'engineering artifacts'?

Yes, someone did.

ToddSchneider: Mike, your audio transmission continues to break.

MB there are ontologies that are developed for an engineering solution purpose, and ontologies that are developed as concept models

These each have a purpose, but for concept models, but not necessarily an end application purpose.

Do we all subscribe to the premise that there are ontologies for applications (e.g. Semantic Web) and ontologies for reference (concept ontologies) and that these are each valid and valuable?

It follows that there are different guideliens for how to create one or the other of these.

KB: We need to be able to articulate the purpose.

Also we need guidelines for how we articulate the different kinds of purpose.

Are we presuming a common definition for what an ontology is.

MB: Yes, see Gruber.

An ontology is a formal specification of a conceptualization.

MB likes this because it is broad enough that the kinds of ontology we are trying to distinguish between, are all included within this definition.

KB dislikes it as it uses words that are themselves vague.

KB: JFS would would say that an ontology is a FOL theory, which misses the point, since theory does not necessarily have a connection to anything else.

KB you need to connect the words (or symbols? MB) to the things they are about. The words are the ontology.

TS: An ontology does nto need to be in FOL, you can use natural language.

TZ: The whole idea is to communicate something.

TS mentions the use of natural language.

TS has a problem with Gruber notion of Conceptualization.

KB sees people parroting that definition in papers all the time. But then they don't seem to use it again.

KB the Gruber definition wold also cover any computer program.

MB: a program has an ontology but is it not an ontology.

So the definition admits to some things that we would not admit as ontologies.

TS: how would that example compare with formalisms that accept of more than one interpretation.

Can we use Gruber and acknowledge that there are potential issues with it.

MB the notion of ontology is (a) it has aboutness where that aboutness is of things in the world, and has some formalism that does not admit of multiple interpretations.

KB: that works in that it rules out the interpretation of this as including computer programs.

TS it also constrains you to one interpretation.

TS correction; not that it constrains you to one interpretation, but that it constrains interpretations.

See Nicola Guarino slides on that.

MB would include higher orders of logic, mathematics also as formalisms in which you can make the formal specification of a conceptualization - would include that in ontology

all agree

Context?

We had a summit on that.

ToddSchneider: Vocabulary :: the body of words used in a particular language

ToddSchneider: But the interpretations of the 'words' in a vocabulary are left open.

MB: in terminology (AKA vocabulary in some senses), Word W refers to concept C in context X.

Meaning of a word is contextual.

https://wiki.iaoa.org/index.php/Edu:Ontology

Todd has a diagram showing the spectrum of ontologies

the page at https://wiki.iaoa.org/index.php/Edu:Term_List includes kinds of ontology.

THe ontolgoy definition page defines ontology as a count noun (correct) but definitions (1) and (2) are not of the count noun itself at all.

ToddSchneider: Ontologies by form or by function

ToddSchneider: Formalism vs. Aboutness

Todd's diagram was created in response to the very question we are addressign in this SIG so it's our first deiverable.

Todd's diagram was created in response to the very question we are addressign in this SIG so it's our first deiverable.

What else do we need to say about the distinctions between these?

TS: This is also based on Tarski model theory.

TS: There are issues with natural language since there can be ambiguity in how words are used.

Oxford English Dictionary has a new thing called Lexico that gives a partial view, for free. You don't get to see the history of the word.

Actions:

We can do a set of wiki pages on our site.

We can use the terms in the Edu term list as a starting pi=oint for our structure.

We will not be using Leo's well-known diagram for a number of reasons. We should review it howeever since it is well referenced, and to see what in that is useful for us in articulating the things we need to articulate.

MB we need to articulate the distinctions between these things before we can articulate guidelines for how one would develop these things. That's why our work is broader than simply 'Guidelines'.

Next: think about formalisms, next time. If we can't define it, at least give many examples.

ToddSchneider: Formalism :: give (something) a definite structure or shape

Next Meeting 2 November, 2pm

== Attendees ==

* MikeBennett
* ToddSchneider
* KenBaclawski

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20201005

2020-10-05T16:13:53Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20201005

2020-10-05T16:13:13Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20201005

2020-10-05T16:12:21Z

MikeHypercube: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10" |- ! scope="row" | Number | sequence::82 |- ! scope="row" | Duration | duration:..."

SWAO:Conference Call 20200803

2020-09-07T16:15:26Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::81]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::August 3 2020 19:00 GMT]]
|-
| 12:00pm PDT/3:00pm EDT
|-
| 8:00pm BST/9:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

NOTE NEW TIME: 3pm Eastern Time going forward

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Ontology Articulation Guidelines
** New activity focusing on best practice for the semantics aspects of ontology development
** Next steps
* Status and updates
** Current progress and prospects for the special issue on explanation.
* Housekeeping
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== Housekeeping ===

SoapHub is not dead

Action: reinstate the URL and description to the Comms page on the wiki

=== Ontology Articulation Guidelines ===

Are we being idealistic in thinking that we can accommodate each of the various stances and describe them in a broader context rather than presuming what is right or wrong

Example - Realism - there is no one kind of Realism it needs to be stated in a context e.g. according to this group they may subscribe to this kind of Realism, this definition of Realism.

Similar computational versus non computational ontologies - may be different views in those spaces.

So we can't really say that even a given stance like Realism is one thing, it needs to be framed in a given context.

==== Where to start? ====

Characterize the contexts of usage of these different notions.

Some considerations:

On the computational side - developers of a given ontology may not have in mind the more abstract concepts in mind

They may not be looking at the same grounding of concepts as would be seen in a 'philosophical' ontology.

A lay person might have a different view again.

So a given ontology may not have a world view in mind because these questions are not raised and addressed.

This is a good statement of the problem space we are trying to address.

Important to not be imposing something of these upon the group that developed the thing.

So we have a good framing - when someone present an ontology they often will not have made those distinctions (may not even accept them in some cases) - can we use this in our framing / introduction of the exercise?

So we have material for an introductory page for what we want to do.

==== Actions to take this forward ====

Write introductory page - MB (with help from RR)

Somewhere to put such stuff. Where? (KB)

Put it in the wiki.

What to call the main page for this effort?

Call it: Ontology Articulation Guidelines

==== Some resources ====

Smith, Sowa, Guizzardi, also others (insert below)

Robert rovetto: R.Mizoguchi

Robert rovetto: Heinrich Herre & Frank Loebe

Robert rovetto: Adam Pease

We did a library for Ontology Summit some years ago.

MB has it somewhere.

Was it on the Ontolog forum wiki (the old cim3 one).

It was in some special tool? Not sure

MB to look into this.

Clarify the goal for this task

Create a web page that has guidelines for ontology design? Or something else?

A clearing house of pointers?

Start with context of terms like Realism itself.

e.g. may take a given applied ontology, it may state that it is Realist or Conceptualist but you can't take it without further detail.

It may even be Realist wrt specific entities but not others. If your domain requires a certain category and you might find that the ontology you want to use won't allow that because of its commitments. Should not fit your subject matter under the world view of another. Need the ontology to be transparent about what it would accept, reject or differently characterize according to its world view.

Also relates to ethics in ontology development.

Also there are sometimes commercial drivers to the language used for things. Need to get past to what is being committed to.

Need to be able to say when you use or not use a given TLO - e.g. some people are advocating certain TLOs as they are in ISO, but it might not be the one for that particular usage.

See ISO Part 1.

AS IAOA we need to encourage more diversity.

Encourage awareness of all work d views and corresponding ontology.

==== Next steps ====

Start to grow the wiki (1st page, then grow an area around it

Start to build the Bibliography

=== Special Edition ===

NTR

=== Housekeeping (cont'd from above) ===

GoToMeeting - has a note taking feature.

KB: Listed as a new feature, separate from the transcription. Also separate from the use of the Chat Log

Called Smart Meeting Assistant.

KB to look into that and see it's something we can use.

Seems to be a search feature for searching the transcript or something. Will take you to the part of the video corresponding to that part of the transcript.

GTM - still using MB account. Doesn't have the above features.

=== AoB ===

=== Next Meeting ===

Sept 7 - is that Labor Day? It is

So next meeting = 14 September

Report to IAOA - when?

Post a note about our meeting on the IAOA website.

We need to do one of these after each meeting

How: Send KB a couple of sentences. MB to draft. RR can review.

By...

== Attendees ==

* MikeBennett
* RobertRovetto
* KenBaclawski

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20200803

2020-09-07T16:14:43Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20200907

2020-09-07T16:04:12Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20200907

2020-09-07T16:03:30Z

SWAO:Connection Details GTM

2020-08-04T16:16:02Z

MikeHypercube:

== [[SWAO:Home|SWAO SIG]] Team Conference Call Connection details ==

* Dial-in and Screen-share (GoToMeeting):
** Please join the on-line meeting (screen share and voice over IP access).
*** https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/691770629
** Use your microphone and speakers (VoIP) - a headset is recommended.
** Or, call in using your telephone on one of the numbers below.
*** United Kingdom: +44 (0) 20 3713 5011
*** Australia: +61 2 8355 1034
*** Austria: +43 7 2088 0716
*** Belgium: +32 (0) 28 93 7002
*** Canada: +1 (647) 497-9372
*** Denmark: +45 69 91 84 58
*** Finland: +358 (0) 923 17 0556
*** France: +33 (0) 170 950 590
*** Germany: +49 (0) 692 5736 7206
*** Ireland: +353 (0) 19 030 053
*** Italy: +39 0 699 26 68 65
*** Netherlands: +31 (0) 208 080 759
*** New Zealand: +64 9 974 9579
*** Norway: +47 21 04 30 59
*** Spain: +34 931 76 1534
*** Sweden: +46 (0) 852 500 691
*** Switzerland: +41 (0) 435 0026 89
*** United States: +1 (669) 224-3319
** Access Code: 691-770-629
*** Meeting ID: 691-770-629
*** Audio PIN: Shown after joining the meeting
*** or just press #
** GoToMeeting®
*** Online Meetings Made Easy®
***Not at your computer? Click the link to join this meeting from your iPhone®, iPad®, Android® or Windows Phone® device via the GoToMeeting app.

* In-session chat-room url: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/iaoa-swao
** If the soaphub site is not available, then we will use the GoToMeeting® chat room.
** instructions: once you got access to the page, click on the "settings" button, and identify yourself (by modifying the Name field from "anonymous" to your real name, like "JaneDoe").
** You can indicate that you want to ask a question verbally by clicking on the "hand" button, and wait for the moderator to call on you; or, type and send your question into the chat window at the bottom of the screen.

[[Category:SWAO| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20200803

2020-08-03T15:53:06Z

MikeHypercube: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10" |- ! scope="row" | Number | sequence::81 |- ! scope="row" | Duration | duration:..."

SWAO:Conference Call 20200601

2020-07-06T16:13:15Z

MikeHypercube: /* Attendees */

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::79]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::June 8 2020 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00 PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 7:00pm BST/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

NOTICE: This month's call has been rescheduled to Monday 8 June (next week, same time) due to a conflict.

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Status and updates
** The IAOA EC has asked that we post a brief summary on the IAOA website each month.
** Current progress and prospects for the special issue on explanation.
* Housekeeping
** The soaphub site is no longer reliably available. What is the long term solution?
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== Status and Updates: ===
==== IAOA EC Request ====
Clarify: which EC? Executive Committee

Note that Education Committee is now abbreviated EDC

(Note that EDC has been a bit quiet).

Next EC meeting tomorrow 9 June.

They would like us to post (put up a formal posting) once a month of a summary of SWAO activities.

Q: Would meeting minutes suffice for that?

A: No.

They want to show activities going on.

Also this would be a mechanism for recruiting new members.

=== Attracting New Members ===
We need to do something to attract new members; we need new members to do anything.

So we should have something to show, that requires only existing members, and can attract new ones.

==== Special Edition ====
KB: We can present the Special Edition activity as such an activity.

Q: Up to now that has not been an activity of this SIG. Are we now appropriating this?

Membership differs - Ram sri Ram and Gary Berg Cross are not members / regular attendees of this SIG.

How would we sell this as a proposition to new members of this SIG?

We would have to do a lot of spinning to make this work.

What would we be asking new people to do?

This post is only to show what we have done, not something we are asking new members to help with.

Resolution: We can say that this SIG is 'participating in' the Special Issue.

=== SWAO SIG Purpose ===
Our real purpose is not only the Semantic Web but other groups too

Historically included Big Data.

Potentially also AI and so on.

TS: Also software development community - so the connection with the Semantic Web is not distant.

“Forum for multiple communities to work collaboratively in tackling common problems.“

(from the mission statement)

Examples:

* Semantic Web
* Big Data
* Knowledge Graph
* Linked Data

This is all on the general description page.

Charter is separate.

Written before Knowledge Graph became a buzzword.

So the Special Issue does fit into this framework.

MB in the things we have done, apart from our earlier Special Issue, we have never really originated an activity at this SIG, we've really worked on helping with other thinigs, housekeeping and so on over the years.

We need something we are about to do that people would want to join in order to participate in.

=== Ontology Analysis as new SWAO SIG Focus ===
TS Proposal: What if we spearhead this notion of analysis (i.e. how to figure out the semantics you need to represent, as distinct from just OWLifying vocabulary).

TS has processes for analysing natural language with a goal of developing ontology. Has a linguistics art and an ontological partr. This is in progress. Slanted to IOF so geared towards use of BFO.

MB also saw a good thing from Barry Smith on ontology development guidelines, but again this is also somewhat specific to the BFO 'REalist' approach.

See also Stefan Schultz and Ludger Janssen and others. TS did a review of this a while back.

MB: IT would be good to have a more generalised set of ontology development guidelines that are not locked into BFO's type of Realism.

TS: Also there's the challenge in using natural language terms as the signature for a concept, which makes it hard to divorce that understanding from the symbol.

==== Example Topic: Word Abuse ====
KB: The notion of 'Word abuse' given in a talk by Robert Hoffman at Stanford CS520 recently.

KB has been objecting to this kind of thing for decades.

TS asks to clarify.

JB: Example: 'What's the connection between an IQ test and intelligence'. Answer was 'intelligence is defined to be your score on an IQ test'. Unexpected answer.

Other research indicates low correlation between the natural definition of intelligence and IQ scores.

People end up getting grants (pragmatics) for IQ on the false premise that they are looking at intelligence as generally understood.

Also the word 'intelligence' in AI definitely does not map to IQ.

MB there's almost nothing about an AI system that maps to IQ.

TS: Examples of this in BFO v2.

What was intended is often completely different to what was expected.

BFO overcomes this by having non meaningful labels.

MB: in ontology all we can do is define concepts and give them words as labels. We can't define the 'actual' meaning of a word across the whole semantic space that that word maps to.

==== Ontology Analysis ====

So the above side conversation on ‘word abuse’ was today's activity.

What shall we call this activity as seen above?

KB: There are a number of sources for the things above, e.g. an article by Todd.

What about if we got MB and TS to present their views on the above and present to the group. That might give us a focus in completing some of the thoughts of BM and TS, i.e. an incentive to complete the documentation of this thinking

KB: Existing development methodologies seem to focus on the syntax not the semantics.

MB: BS's paper is a good example of the right focus, though constrained to a given paradigm.

ToddSchneider: 'Guideline on Developing Good Ontologies in the Biomedical Domain with Description Logics'; URL: http://www.purl.org/goodod/guideline

KB: Good example in Ontology101 'Burgundy is a kind of wine'

We need heuristics and guidelines. Collect and disseminate these so that all the communities doing semantics we do it the same way.

MB this would be a huge contribution to the industry.

Smith has covered some of this but not all (nothing about restrictions etc.).

==== Conclusions ====
So we have an activity.

Need a name for it.

This is our new project.

We had our first discussion on it today. This is an ongoing activity.

Examples:

Monohierarchy v polyhierarchy

What to call it examples: Principles, Guidelines, Heuristics...

Collected wisdom.

e.g. principle of monohierarchy. Pros and cons.

Get away from the doctrinaire approach where someone thinks their own usage is the only correct one.

ToddSchneider: "Best Practices of Ontology Development", available from https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xV8KNp2mpruQF2s07-WcyYE5uux64QVW/view

KB: Smith talks about Normalization, to deal with combination classes. Have first to normalize your hierarchy into monohierarchies and then have rules for how to combine concepts from the different monohierarchies, leading to a polyhierarchy but you can see from each term where it came from.

MB has written extensively about mon v poly but not about normalization in the sense given in Smith. So we should look at that.

TS: Don't discount the value of BFO and others.

MB strongly agree - we should be able to have guidelines that work across and between the different ontological stances, for example knowing when to use realism.

TS: Also when to use a particular TLO in your analysis.

Also other methodological matters e.g. hub and spoke (now Snowflake).

KB: How you extend the snowflake. Its hierarchy would be a tree with a root node attached to one of the leaf nodes of your snowflake.

TS: That's nonsense.

That's an example of a certain technique that is useful in certain cases.

KB research of category theory for KGs. When you do the above and extend from the leaf node, you get a pushful transformation

A pushful transformation causes changes at other levels.

Multi-level hierarchies.

in the sense of meta-levels not in the sense of abstractions

Clarify do we mean meta-levels or abstraction levels?

We mean meta-levels here.

So you end up inducing transformations on lower levels. Doesn't happen just for any kind of design but only for the hub and spoke design.

Unexpected advantage.

Guidelines - semantic.

Come up with a workstream.

We can report back on that tomorrow.

Name for this new Activity:
Needs to include 'analysis' so people get away from the idea that it is a cookie cutter approach.

KB likes 'guideline'

'Semantic Analysis Guidelines'?

KB: Analysis too many-meaninged

Ontological modeling guidelines?

Pre-cursor to modeling.

Principles.

That would replace 'guidelines' not 'modeling' or 'analysis' which is the word we are trying to deal with.

Example of 'ontology path dependence principle' which is a Principle.

Guidelines or Principles - not a problem

The problem word is Analysis.

Ontology Development Guidelines.

Ontology articulation guidelines

Analysis - was too reactive, need something proactive.

Hence Development, or Articulation or something.

Outcome: 'Ontology Articulation Guidelines'.

=== Housekeeping ===
SoapHub Unknown, so best not to rely on this.

For these meetings, we will continue to use GoToMeeting.

=== Next Meeting ===
July 6

(no holidays that day but is after the July 4 weekend)

Same time, July 6.

== Attendees ==

* KenBaclawski
* ToddSchneider
* MikeBennett

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20200601

2020-07-06T16:12:06Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::79]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::June 8 2020 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00 PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 7:00pm BST/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

NOTICE: This month's call has been rescheduled to Monday 8 June (next week, same time) due to a conflict.

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Status and updates
** The IAOA EC has asked that we post a brief summary on the IAOA website each month.
** Current progress and prospects for the special issue on explanation.
* Housekeeping
** The soaphub site is no longer reliably available. What is the long term solution?
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== Status and Updates: ===
==== IAOA EC Request ====
Clarify: which EC? Executive Committee

Note that Education Committee is now abbreviated EDC

(Note that EDC has been a bit quiet).

Next EC meeting tomorrow 9 June.

They would like us to post (put up a formal posting) once a month of a summary of SWAO activities.

Q: Would meeting minutes suffice for that?

A: No.

They want to show activities going on.

Also this would be a mechanism for recruiting new members.

=== Attracting New Members ===
We need to do something to attract new members; we need new members to do anything.

So we should have something to show, that requires only existing members, and can attract new ones.

==== Special Edition ====
KB: We can present the Special Edition activity as such an activity.

Q: Up to now that has not been an activity of this SIG. Are we now appropriating this?

Membership differs - Ram sri Ram and Gary Berg Cross are not members / regular attendees of this SIG.

How would we sell this as a proposition to new members of this SIG?

We would have to do a lot of spinning to make this work.

What would we be asking new people to do?

This post is only to show what we have done, not something we are asking new members to help with.

Resolution: We can say that this SIG is 'participating in' the Special Issue.

=== SWAO SIG Purpose ===
Our real purpose is not only the Semantic Web but other groups too

Historically included Big Data.

Potentially also AI and so on.

TS: Also software development community - so the connection with the Semantic Web is not distant.

“Forum for multiple communities to work collaboratively in tackling common problems.“

(from the mission statement)

Examples:

* Semantic Web
* Big Data
* Knowledge Graph
* Linked Data

This is all on the general description page.

Charter is separate.

Written before Knowledge Graph became a buzzword.

So the Special Issue does fit into this framework.

MB in the things we have done, apart from our earlier Special Issue, we have never really originated an activity at this SIG, we've really worked on helping with other thinigs, housekeeping and so on over the years.

We need something we are about to do that people would want to join in order to participate in.

=== Ontology Analysis as new SWAO SIG Focus ===
TS Proposal: What if we spearhead this notion of analysis (i.e. how to figure out the semantics you need to represent, as distinct from just OWLifying vocabulary).

TS has processes for analysing natural language with a goal of developing ontology. Has a linguistics art and an ontological partr. This is in progress. Slanted to IOF so geared towards use of BFO.

MB also saw a good thing from Barry Smith on ontology development guidelines, but again this is also somewhat specific to the BFO 'REalist' approach.

See also Stefan Schultz and Ludger Janssen and others. TS did a review of this a while back.

MB: IT would be good to have a more generalised set of ontology development guidelines that are not locked into BFO's type of Realism.

TS: Also there's the challenge in using natural language terms as the signature for a concept, which makes it hard to divorce that understanding from the symbol.

==== Example Topic: Word Abuse ====
KB: The notion of 'Word abuse' given in a talk by Robert Hoffman at Stanford CS520 recently.

KB has been objecting to this kind of thing for decades.

TS asks to clarify.

JB: Example: 'What's the connection between an IQ test and intelligence'. Answer was 'intelligence is defined to be your score on an IQ test'. Unexpected answer.

Other research indicates low correlation between the natural definition of intelligence and IQ scores.

People end up getting grants (pragmatics) for IQ on the false premise that they are looking at intelligence as generally understood.

Also the word 'intelligence' in AI definitely does not map to IQ.

MB there's almost nothing about an AI system that maps to IQ.

TS: Examples of this in BFO v2.

What was intended is often completely different to what was expected.

BFO overcomes this by having non meaningful labels.

MB: in ontology all we can do is define concepts and give them words as labels. We can't define the 'actual' meaning of a word across the whole semantic space that that word maps to.

==== Ontology Analysis ====

So the above side conversation on ‘word abuse’ was today's activity.

What shall we call this activity as seen above?

KB: There are a number of sources for the things above, e.g. an article by Todd.

What about if we got MB and TS to present their views on the above and present to the group. That might give us a focus in completing some of the thoughts of BM and TS, i.e. an incentive to complete the documentation of this thinking

KB: Existing development methodologies seem to focus on the syntax not the semantics.

MB: BS's paper is a good example of the right focus, though constrained to a given paradigm.

ToddSchneider: 'Guideline on Developing Good Ontologies in the Biomedical Domain with Description Logics'; URL: http://www.purl.org/goodod/guideline

KB: Good example in Ontology101 'Burgundy is a kind of wine'

We need heuristics and guidelines. Collect and disseminate these so that all the communities doing semantics we do it the same way.

MB this would be a huge contribution to the industry.

Smith has covered some of this but not all (nothing about restrictions etc.).

==== Conclusions ====
So we have an activity.

Need a name for it.

This is our new project.

We had our first discussion on it today. This is an ongoing activity.

Examples:

Monohierarchy v polyhierarchy

What to call it examples: Principles, Guidelines, Heuristics...

Collected wisdom.

e.g. principle of monohierarchy. Pros and cons.

Get away from the doctrinaire approach where someone thinks their own usage is the only correct one.

ToddSchneider: "Best Practices of Ontology Development", available from https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xV8KNp2mpruQF2s07-WcyYE5uux64QVW/view

KB: Smith talks about Normalization, to deal with combination classes. Have first to normalize your hierarchy into monohierarchies and then have rules for how to combine concepts from the different monohierarchies, leading to a polyhierarchy but you can see from each term where it came from.

MB has written extensively about mon v poly but not about normalization in the sense given in Smith. So we should look at that.

TS: Don't discount the value of BFO and others.

MB strongly agree - we should be able to have guidelines that work across and between the different ontological stances, for example knowing when to use realism.

TS: Also when to use a particular TLO in your analysis.

Also other methodological matters e.g. hub and spoke (now Snowflake).

KB: How you extend the snowflake. Its hierarchy would be a tree with a root node attached to one of the leaf nodes of your snowflake.

TS: That's nonsense.

That's an example of a certain technique that is useful in certain cases.

KB research of category theory for KGs. When you do the above and extend from the leaf node, you get a pushful transformation

A pushful transformation causes changes at other levels.

Multi-level hierarchies.

in the sense of meta-levels not in the sense of abstractions

Clarify do we mean meta-levels or abstraction levels?

We mean meta-levels here.

So you end up inducing transformations on lower levels. Doesn't happen just for any kind of design but only for the hub and spoke design.

Unexpected advantage.

Guidelines - semantic.

Come up with a workstream.

We can report back on that tomorrow.

Name for this new Activity:
Needs to include 'analysis' so people get away from the idea that it is a cookie cutter approach.

KB likes 'guideline'

'Semantic Analysis Guidelines'?

KB: Analysis too many-meaninged

Ontological modeling guidelines?

Pre-cursor to modeling.

Principles.

That would replace 'guidelines' not 'modeling' or 'analysis' which is the word we are trying to deal with.

Example of 'ontology path dependence principle' which is a Principle.

Guidelines or Principles - not a problem

The problem word is Analysis.

Ontology Development Guidelines.

Ontology articulation guidelines

Analysis - was too reactive, need something proactive.

Hence Development, or Articulation or something.

Outcome: 'Ontology Articulation Guidelines'.

=== Housekeeping ===
SoapHub Unknown, so best not to rely on this.

For these meetings, we will continue to use GoToMeeting.

=== Next Meeting ===
July 6

(no holidays that day but is after the July 4 weekend)

Same time, July 6.

== Attendees ==

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20200706

2020-07-06T15:46:32Z

MikeHypercube: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10" |- ! scope="row" | Number | sequence::80 |- ! scope="row" | Duration | duration:..."

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::80]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::July 6 2020 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00 PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 7:00pm BST/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Ontology Articulation Guidelines
** New activity focusing on best practice for the semantics aspects of ontology development
** Outline, planning, next steps
* Status and updates
** Current progress and prospects for the special issue on explanation.
* Housekeeping
** Is SoapHub backk?
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

== Attendees ==

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20200504

2020-06-08T15:46:43Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::78]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::May 4 2020 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00 PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 7:00pm BST/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Status and updates
* Housekeeping
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== CogSima ===

CogSima - last week of August, remote.

Fee probably of the order of $100.00

(early bird rate; if there is such a distinction)

No actions required today.

=== Housekeeping ===

Ken doing a full quarterly backup of the Ontolog Forum repository, as well as incremental backups every night.

=== AoB? ===

Nothing today.

=== Next meeting ===

1 June (not a holiday in US or UK).

== Attendees ==

* KenBaclawski
* MikeBennett

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Connection Details GTM

2020-06-01T13:41:10Z

MikeHypercube:

== [[SWAO:Home|SWAO SIG]] Team Conference Call Connection details ==

* Dial-in and Screen-share (GoToMeeting):
** Please join the on-line meeting (screen share and voice over IP access).
*** https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/691770629
** Use your microphone and speakers (VoIP) - a headset is recommended.
** Or, call in using your telephone on one of the numbers below.
*** United Kingdom: +44 (0) 20 3713 5011
*** Australia: +61 2 8355 1034
*** Austria: +43 7 2088 0716
*** Belgium: +32 (0) 28 93 7002
*** Canada: +1 (647) 497-9372
*** Denmark: +45 69 91 84 58
*** Finland: +358 (0) 923 17 0556
*** France: +33 (0) 170 950 590
*** Germany: +49 (0) 692 5736 7206
*** Ireland: +353 (0) 19 030 053
*** Italy: +39 0 699 26 68 65
*** Netherlands: +31 (0) 208 080 759
*** New Zealand: +64 9 974 9579
*** Norway: +47 21 04 30 59
*** Spain: +34 931 76 1534
*** Sweden: +46 (0) 852 500 691
*** Switzerland: +41 (0) 435 0026 89
*** United States: +1 (669) 224-3319
** Access Code: 691-770-629
*** Meeting ID: 691-770-629
*** Audio PIN: Shown after joining the meeting
*** or just press #
** GoToMeeting®
*** Online Meetings Made Easy®
***Not at your computer? Click the link to join this meeting from your iPhone®, iPad®, Android® or Windows Phone® device via the GoToMeeting app.

* In-session chat: Soaphub no longer available
** use the GoToMeeting® chat facility to record notes

[[Category:SWAO| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20200601

2020-06-01T13:37:54Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20200601

2020-06-01T13:36:46Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20200406

2020-04-06T23:10:02Z

MikeHypercube: /* 3. Ken paper on Category Theory */

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::77]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::April 6 2020 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00 PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 7:00pm BST/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Status and updates
** CogSima Workshop plans and status
* Housekeeping
** Ken is getting iaoa-swao mailing list bounces. Not sure how to deal with this.
* Ken's done a paper on category theory for multi-level modeling. It mentions RDF, ontologies, knowledge graphs, and even upper ontologies. Ken has just finished submitting this. Not sure if everyone in SWAO has seen the presentation for this.
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==
=== 1. CogSima ===

Q: Anything from the organizers?

A: They are going virtual - already confirmed.

KB: Not sure of the value of a workshop which can be done any time.

MB: at the OMG meeting it was a benefit to have people all in one block of time so this is worth pursuing.

On CogSima dates - see this from email from Ken: the CogSIMA conference where I was planning to have a workshop has been postponed. It will now be in August or September.

Likely to be all virtual as well as being in August or September.

=== 2. Housekeeping: Mail List ===

Ken has been getting bounces

From what to what?

At this point we looked at examples on Ken’s and Mike’s emails.

Outcome: These are not bounces they are simply from an address called ‘bounces’.

MB: Sounds like a code review weakness - someone thinks of a name for a thing in one context that makes no sense in other contexts.

Ken was unable to log in to the thing.

MB has not tried recently. Looked now.

When Ken goes to the link there is no clear indication of how to accept the post or pending subscription.

==== Bounces Summary: ====

The misnamed 'bounces' email sends one email per day for pending subscriptions. The one we are seeing was actioned by Frank Loebe but not right away. There were emails each day to Ken and to Mike from the poorly named ‘bounces’ address until he did.

Conclusion: We continue to not need to do anything on these.

=== 3. Ken paper on Category Theory ===

MB has not seen this.

There is a paper and a presentation.

Submitted to Special Issue of Software and Systems Modeling journal. Special Issue on Multi Level Modeling.

Q: What's MLM?

A: This is based on e.g. the OMG MOF.

Q: So is this 'levels' in the meta sense, not in the sense of Conceptual / Logical / Physical?

A: 'Levels' here is e.g. M0 M1 M2 and so on. As defined in OMG literature. But also levels of design elaboration. The paper covers both.

==== Presentation ====

For the rest of the meeting, Ken went through the slide deck, with feedback and questions from Mike.

MB: This will be of interest to several of our researchers in the Semantic Shed community. We would like to have Ken present to this group on a suitable date. Ken agrees to do so. Mike will run this idea past the Shed group this week (the paper will be of interest to some but not others) and then arrange a date for the presentation.

=== Next meeting ===

May 4

NOT a bank holiday in UK as it would normally have been

Not a holiday in the US anyway.

Advertise these meetings a week before and try to get more attendance this time.

=== AoB ===

None.

Meeting ends 15:27

== Attendees ==

* MikeBennett
* KenBaclawski

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20200406

2020-04-06T23:09:40Z

MikeHypercube: /* Bounces Summary: */

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::77]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::April 6 2020 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00 PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 7:00pm BST/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Status and updates
** CogSima Workshop plans and status
* Housekeeping
** Ken is getting iaoa-swao mailing list bounces. Not sure how to deal with this.
* Ken's done a paper on category theory for multi-level modeling. It mentions RDF, ontologies, knowledge graphs, and even upper ontologies. Ken has just finished submitting this. Not sure if everyone in SWAO has seen the presentation for this.
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==
=== 1. CogSima ===

Q: Anything from the organizers?

A: They are going virtual - already confirmed.

KB: Not sure of the value of a workshop which can be done any time.

MB: at the OMG meeting it was a benefit to have people all in one block of time so this is worth pursuing.

On CogSima dates - see this from email from Ken: the CogSIMA conference where I was planning to have a workshop has been postponed. It will now be in August or September.

Likely to be all virtual as well as being in August or September.

=== 2. Housekeeping: Mail List ===

Ken has been getting bounces

From what to what?

At this point we looked at examples on Ken’s and Mike’s emails.

Outcome: These are not bounces they are simply from an address called ‘bounces’.

MB: Sounds like a code review weakness - someone thinks of a name for a thing in one context that makes no sense in other contexts.

Ken was unable to log in to the thing.

MB has not tried recently. Looked now.

When Ken goes to the link there is no clear indication of how to accept the post or pending subscription.

==== Bounces Summary: ====

The misnamed 'bounces' email sends one email per day for pending subscriptions. The one we are seeing was actioned by Frank Loebe but not right away. There were emails each day to Ken and to Mike from the poorly named ‘bounces’ address until he did.

Conclusion: We continue to not need to do anything on these.

=== 3. Ken paper on Category Theory ===

MB has not seen this.

Presentation not paper.

There is a paper and a presentation.

Submitted to Special Issue of Software and Systems Modeling journal. Special Issue on Multi Level Modeling.

Q: What's MLM?

A: This is based on e.g. the OMG MOF.

Q: So is this 'levels' in the meta sense, not in the sense of Conceptual / Logical / Physical?

A: 'Levels' here is e.g. M0 M1 M2 and so on. As defined in OMG literature. But also levels of design elaboration. The paper covers both.

==== Presentation ====

For the rest of the meeting, Ken went through the slide deck, with feedback and questions from Mike.

MB: This will be of interest to several of our researchers in the Semantic Shed community. We would like to have Ken present to this group on a suitable date. Ken agrees to do so. Mike will run this idea past the Shed group this week (the paper will be of interest to some but not others) and then arrange a date for the presentation.

=== Next meeting ===

May 4

NOT a bank holiday in UK as it would normally have been

Not a holiday in the US anyway.

Advertise these meetings a week before and try to get more attendance this time.

=== AoB ===

None.

Meeting ends 15:27

== Attendees ==

* MikeBennett
* KenBaclawski

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20200406

2020-04-06T23:09:03Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::77]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::April 6 2020 18:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00 PDT/2:00pm EDT
|-
| 7:00pm BST/8:00pm CEST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Status and updates
** CogSima Workshop plans and status
* Housekeeping
** Ken is getting iaoa-swao mailing list bounces. Not sure how to deal with this.
* Ken's done a paper on category theory for multi-level modeling. It mentions RDF, ontologies, knowledge graphs, and even upper ontologies. Ken has just finished submitting this. Not sure if everyone in SWAO has seen the presentation for this.
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==
=== 1. CogSima ===

Q: Anything from the organizers?

A: They are going virtual - already confirmed.

KB: Not sure of the value of a workshop which can be done any time.

MB: at the OMG meeting it was a benefit to have people all in one block of time so this is worth pursuing.

On CogSima dates - see this from email from Ken: the CogSIMA conference where I was planning to have a workshop has been postponed. It will now be in August or September.

Likely to be all virtual as well as being in August or September.

=== 2. Housekeeping: Mail List ===

Ken has been getting bounces

From what to what?

At this point we looked at examples on Ken’s and Mike’s emails.

Outcome: These are not bounces they are simply from an address called ‘bounces’.

MB: Sounds like a code review weakness - someone thinks of a name for a thing in one context that makes no sense in other contexts.

Ken was unable to log in to the thing.

MB has not tried recently. Looked now.

When Ken goes to the link there is no clear indication of how to accept the post or pending subscription.

==== Bounces Summary: ====

The misnamed 'bounces' email sends one email per day for pending subscriptions. The one we are seeing was actioned by Frank Loebe but not right away. There were emails each day to Ken and to Mike from the poorly named ‘bounces’ address until he did.

*Conclusion:* We continue to not need to do anything on these.

=== 3. Ken paper on Category Theory ===

MB has not seen this.

Presentation not paper.

There is a paper and a presentation.

Submitted to Special Issue of Software and Systems Modeling journal. Special Issue on Multi Level Modeling.

Q: What's MLM?

A: This is based on e.g. the OMG MOF.

Q: So is this 'levels' in the meta sense, not in the sense of Conceptual / Logical / Physical?

A: 'Levels' here is e.g. M0 M1 M2 and so on. As defined in OMG literature. But also levels of design elaboration. The paper covers both.

==== Presentation ====

For the rest of the meeting, Ken went through the slide deck, with feedback and questions from Mike.

MB: This will be of interest to several of our researchers in the Semantic Shed community. We would like to have Ken present to this group on a suitable date. Ken agrees to do so. Mike will run this idea past the Shed group this week (the paper will be of interest to some but not others) and then arrange a date for the presentation.

=== Next meeting ===

May 4

NOT a bank holiday in UK as it would normally have been

Not a holiday in the US anyway.

Advertise these meetings a week before and try to get more attendance this time.

=== AoB ===

None.

Meeting ends 15:27

== Attendees ==

* MikeBennett
* KenBaclawski

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20200406

2020-04-06T16:45:27Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20200406

2020-04-06T16:44:47Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20200302

2020-04-06T15:41:20Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::76]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::March 2 2020 19:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00 PST/2:00pm EST
|-
| 7:00pm GMT/8:00pm CST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Status and updates
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== Meetings / Agenda Discussion ===
==== Previous Meetings ====
Note: we should not include deliberations from the IAOA Executive Council in our notes.

==== Any other agenda items? ====
KB: Yes: Workshop at CogSima

=== Workshop at CogSima ===

KB: Decided to change the emphasis of the workshop so it is focused on interoperability, nothing about ontologies in the call for position papers.

This call is for position papers for interoperability on situation management and decision making.

CogSima is at Victoria, BC. See cogsima.org

TS: Are you saying that semantics is not critical for situation theory?

KB It is, but the aim of the workshop is to cover interoperability in this context.

KB: The call is not posted yet.

Submission date for Ken's workshop?

ToddSchneider: See https://cogsima.org/index.php/ieee-cogsima-2020/

Workshop papers need to be Jan 01 but these are Position papers so that's not applicable.

The earlier date for things that will be published in the proceedings.

==== CogSima Costs ====
Non-Member CAD 1284.00 CAD 1540.80

The 1st figure is for early registration (March 6)

Anything else on this?

==== Workshop committee ====

KB does not have a Workshop committee - any volunteers?

TS: Yes.

MB: I know nothing of these things. However I could easily wax lyrical about the use of upper ontologies for complex concepts of the sort needed in situation awareness.

MB: Happy to be involved in the Workshop committee if you think this would be useful.

==== Scoping ====

TS: Scoping - how much interoperability of semantics do you need; what is the scope for which you need interoperability?

TS: There is also a SCOPE model out there. Can supply a link. There are 100 separate dimensions plus an unbounded umber of dimensions in a given domain.

ToddSchneider: Clarification: The SCOPE model has about 100 (default) dimensions. SCOPE is the name of the model.

NCOIC (who originally owned the SCOPE model) is now dissolved. TS is one of the principals in this thing.

==== Workshop Proposal ====

KB: Any proposed alterations to the Workshop Proposal (drafts circulated by email) would be welcome. Needed by tomorrow.

This is for what would be posted as a page on the CogSima site - not the proposal itself to CogSima - this has already been accepted. I scheduled for Monday May 4 in the program.

Duration: half day.

==== Workshop Questions ====

MB: is the existing framework for situational awareness (called?) available as a formal ontology e.g. in DL or OWL?

KB: Yes it is. 2 Sources: 1. situation theory (KB, some others); 2nd part is Decision making (OODA Loop).

MB: OODA Loop presumably requires higher orders of expression as it is a control feedback loop (LaPlace Transforms?). Presumably the pieces can be modeled declaratively (1st order logic) as well?

KenBaclawski: Decision Making Ontology (KIDS) is at http://bit.ly/2xZuTNJ

KenBaclawski: The Situation Theory Ontology is at https://ken.baclawski.com/STO.owl

=== Status and updates ===

MB: Presented some training on concept modeling for a client, distinct from the technology side. So that's a thing,

=== AoB? ===

==== Next Meeting: ====

6 April. No major holidays (week before Easter)

ToddSchneider: Meeting ends @14:43 EST

== Attendees ==

* ToddSchneider
* KenBaclawski
* MikeBennett

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20200406

2020-04-06T15:29:49Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20200406

2020-04-06T15:29:09Z

MikeHypercube:

SWAO:Conference Call 20200203

2020-02-03T22:09:10Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::75]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::February 3 2020 19:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00 PST/2:00pm EST
|-
| 7:00pm GMT/8:00pm CST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Status and updates
* Naming: SIG versus Committee
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== Status and Updates ===

==== Naming ====

MikeBennett: EC did not get to the naming issue.

MikeBennett: So we will ignore the naming issue and continue to call ourselves the SWAO SIG.

MikeBennett: Any impact would be on labels used on the IAOA Website to navigate to our wiki page.

MikeBennett: (not a problem)

==== Other EC outcomes? ====

MikeBennett: Any other EC business on SWAO?

MikeBennett: No.

MikeBennett: Our view from last time:

MikeBennett: If something has a mission it is a SIG; if it is tasked with some ongoing delivery for the main body it is a Committee.

==== Aside: IAOA and Ontolog Forum ====

MikeBennett: KB: One thing the IAOA is reluctant to include within IAOA is the Ontolog Forum.

MikeBennett: IAOA originated from discussions on the Ontolog Forum.

MikeBennett: KB: The old archives of Ontolog Forum on CIM3 are sometimes unavailable. KB has downloaded the entire set as a potential back-up.

MikeBennett: Ideally we would remove the remaining references to CIM3 and have these link to the material on this infrastructure - a lot of work.

=== Events ===

==== CogSima ====

MikeBennett: CogSima is coming up in May.

MikeBennett: KB considering whether to have a workshop on ontologies for situation management.

==== Ontology Summit ====

MikeBennett: Ontology Summit got off to a good start

MikeBennett: We even had one or two new people from a more tech / Semantic Tech background.

=== New IAOA SIG ===

MikeBennett: KB to contact MG about his new SIG about potentially working together or overlap / underlap.

MikeBennett: Missions are quite distinct.

MikeBennett: The new SIG is also interested in standards.

MikeBennett: MG's SIG is called Applied Ontology in Industry & Standards Committee

==== New SIG Info and Mission Statement ====

Below is a our draft description of the Applied Ontology in Industry & Standards Committee. This reflects discussion among Stefano, Michael, and myself. Stefano is the primary author, with only light editing by me.

Regards,

Amanda

Industry and Standards (I&S) Committee

-- The IAOA Industry & Standards Committee has two core purposes: (a) to foster the use of applied ontology in standardization initiatives, and (b) to facilitate the interactions across people in industry and in applied ontology research. Activities include the dissemination of information about initiatives with the aim to gather experts interested in the development of ontologically-sound standards, and the organization of virtual and physical meetings and events where to discuss how to understand and apply ontological approaches and methodologies.

Mission Statement

-- Standards may have a huge impact at the domain level, as in industry, communication and business, and on society at large. In order to better align the purpose and organization of standards, and to anticipate their consequences, it is important to improve clarity of standards and the understanding of the domains they address. The use of ontological analysis and ontology-based methodologies are important factors for the development of clear and well organized standards, and to ensure the correct understanding of their domain of application.

-- Today industry uses applications that crucially rely on semantic technologies. In the last 30 years, applied ontology has changed the way to information is understood and classified. Semantic technologies can be a decisive asset in exploitation of information potentialities in industry. This is especially true when robust and reliable information elaboration, sharing, and management are needed. The mutual discussion and interbreeding of industrial application concerns and applied ontology methodologies can improve the work of both communities and help to develop approaches better suited to understand and solve existing problems.

-- The I&S Committee aims to bring together IAOA members and people working in industry and standards development to facilitate information sharing as well as mutual discussion and co-ordination of activities and resources.

Resources

-- The I&S Committee wiki serves as a collection and distribution point for information about its goals and initiatives.

-- The I&S Committee organizes the conference series Formal Ontologies Meet Industry (FOMI).

==== Discussion ====

MikeBennett: AW: Their mission statement is a lot like ours.

MikeBennett: The possible outcomes of the new group's work could include furthering the mission of this SIG.

MikeBennett: AW: Consider joining with that Committee.

MikeBennett: MB: Agree - a possible outcome of applied ontology v standards is that the standards (OWL, RFD, SPARQL etc.) tend to have been the focus of the Semantic Web in any case.

MikeBennett: AW: See also 2nd para of their Mission Statement - 'Semantic Technologies' etc. which seems to bear this out.

==== Resolutions? ====

MikeBennett: AW: Propose we formally combine rather than simply disappear.

==== Actions ====

MikeBennett: KB will contact MG and convey the above.

MikeBennett: MB to get these notes up so KB has something to refer to.

MikeBennett: AW: The final para of their mission statement is almost directly our mission statement.

MikeBennett: MB: Would certainly want to focus on standards in e.g. finance that would make suitable business reference ontologies. There is still a need for that in e.g. Fiannce.

KenBaclawski: "Looking at the missions of SWAO and AOIS, it appears that they overlap enough that it might make sense to consider some relationship between them, possibly even a formal merger."

MikeBennett: AW: Make it more explicit that we would be looking to merge into AOIS not the other way around.

MikeBennett: AW: ' .. of SWAO into AOIS'

MikeBennett: KB proposes a joint meeting.

MikeBennett: All agree this would be good, to ensure we are all really on the same page/

=== Standards ===

AndreaW: Here is another ref to Knowledge Graphs ... https://www.zdnet.com/article/knowledge-graph-evolution-platforms-that-speak-your-language/?hss_channel=tw-224035128&=1

MikeBennett: KB: on standards - the new proposed SQL standard would include RDF capability.

MikeBennett: So this overlaps with SPARQL which was based on SQL originally. So it would effectively subsume SPARQL.

MikeBennett: Called SQL2020 (but don't Google that)

AndreaW: There is also a proposed RDF* standard that really improves reification.

AndreaW: https://www.stardog.com/blog/property-graphs-meet-stardog/

MikeBennett: MB: Thereby allowing for simpler operational ontology transformations out of 'relative things' in the conceptual ontology/

KenBaclawski: [shres transcripts from some slides]

Prospects for SQL 2020: What is going to happen inWG 3 for SQL:2020?
WG 3 identified these areas of interest for the next version of the SQL standard:
Better support for Big Data applications.
Graph queries.
Approximate queries/aggregates and uncertain data.

16

Integration of statistical packages (i.e./e.g., R).
MapReduce support.
Streaming/continuous queries.
Support for blockchains.
BASE transactions.
Any participant can bring forward a proposal for any new functionality

What is going to happen inWG 3 for SQL:2020? (cont.)
At its most recent meeting in January 2017,WG 3 discussed graph databases and query languages:
Time is right for formal standards in this area
Existing work
Technology begins to gel
Market demand

17

WG 3 is interested in property graph technology
Would like to work with LDBC (Graph QL Task Force) to develop formal standards
At the June 2017 SC 32 Plenary, WG 3 will consider:
Applying for a project split for SQL/Graph
Applying for a new work item/give notice of a preliminary new work item for a Property Graph Query* Language
* Query does not necessarily mean read-only retrieval operations only, but can include general DML/DDL operations.

MikeBennett: the above from KB is from an early 2017 slide deck

MikeBennett: Is SPARQL a property graph query language?

MikeBennett: No - more specific to RDF.

MikeBennett: AW: See also StarDog writeup on GraphQL and mapping to other things. SPARQL more tied to RDF and OWL. A graph query language does not deal with the semantics.

KenBaclawski: The source is a slide deck whose title slide is:

Standardizing Graph Database Functionality

An Invitation to Collaborate

Jan Michels, Keith Hare, JimMelton

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32/WG 3 Members

February 9, 2017

MikeBennett: This is also relevant to the Summit.

== Attendees ==

* MikeBennett
* KenBaclawski
* AndreaWesterinen

=== Apologies ===

* ToddSchneider
* BobbinTeegarden

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20200203

2020-02-03T22:08:19Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::75]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::February 3 2020 19:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00 PST/2:00pm EST
|-
| 7:00pm GMT/8:00pm CST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Status and updates
* Naming: SIG versus Committee
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== Status and Updates ===

==== Naming ====

MikeBennett: EC did not get to the naming issue.

MikeBennett: So we will ignore the naming issue and continue to call ourselves the SWAO SIG.

MikeBennett: Any impact would be on labels used on the IAOA Website to navigate to our wiki page.

MikeBennett: (not a problem)

==== Other EC outcomes? ====

MikeBennett: Any other EC business on SWAO?

MikeBennett: No.

MikeBennett: Our view from last time:

MikeBennett: If something has a mission it is a SIG; if it is tasked with some ongoing delivery for the main body it is a Committee.

==== Aside: IAOA and Ontolog Forum ====

MikeBennett: KB: One thing the IAOA is reluctant to include within IAOA is the Ontolog Forum.

MikeBennett: IAOA originated from discussions on the Ontolog Forum.

MikeBennett: KB: The old archives of Ontolog Forum on CIM3 are sometimes unavailable. KB has downloaded the entire set as a potential back-up.

MikeBennett: Ideally we would remove the remaining references to CIM3 and have these link to the material on this infrastructure - a lot of work.

=== Events ===

==== CogSima ====

MikeBennett: CogSima is coming up in May.

MikeBennett: KB considering whether to have a workshop on ontologies for situation management.

==== Ontology Summit ====

MikeBennett: Ontology Summit got off to a good start

MikeBennett: We even had one or two new people from a more tech / Semantic Tech background.

=== New IAOA SIG ===

MikeBennett: KB to contact MG about his new SIG about potentially working together or overlap / underlap.

MikeBennett: Missions are quite distinct.

MikeBennett: The new SIG is also interested in standards.

MikeBennett: MG's SIG is called Applied Ontology in Industry & Standards Committee

==== New SIG Info and Mission Statement ====

Below is a our draft description of the Applied Ontology in Industry & Standards Committee. This reflects discussion among Stefano, Michael, and myself. Stefano is the primary author, with only light editing by me.

Regards,

Amanda

Industry and Standards (I&S) Committee

-- The IAOA Industry & Standards Committee has two core purposes: (a) to foster the use of applied ontology in standardization initiatives, and (b) to facilitate the interactions across people in industry and in applied ontology research. Activities include the dissemination of information about initiatives with the aim to gather experts interested in the development of ontologically-sound standards, and the organization of virtual and physical meetings and events where to discuss how to understand and apply ontological approaches and methodologies.

Mission Statement

-- Standards may have a huge impact at the domain level, as in industry, communication and business, and on society at large. In order to better align the purpose and organization of standards, and to anticipate their consequences, it is important to improve clarity of standards and the understanding of the domains they address. The use of ontological analysis and ontology-based methodologies are important factors for the development of clear and well organized standards, and to ensure the correct understanding of their domain of application.

-- Today industry uses applications that crucially rely on semantic technologies. In the last 30 years, applied ontology has changed the way to information is understood and classified. Semantic technologies can be a decisive asset in exploitation of information potentialities in industry. This is especially true when robust and reliable information elaboration, sharing, and management are needed. The mutual discussion and interbreeding of industrial application concerns and applied ontology methodologies can improve the work of both communities and help to develop approaches better suited to understand and solve existing problems.

-- The I&S Committee aims to bring together IAOA members and people working in industry and standards development to facilitate information sharing as well as mutual discussion and co-ordination of activities and resources.

Resources

-- The I&S Committee wiki serves as a collection and distribution point for information about its goals and initiatives.

-- The I&S Committee organizes the conference series Formal Ontologies Meet Industry (FOMI).

==== Discussion ====

MikeBennett: AW: Their mission statement is a lot like ours.

MikeBennett: The possible outcomes of the new group's work could include furthering the mission of this SIG.

MikeBennett: AW: Consider joining with that Committee.

MikeBennett: MB: Agree - a possible outcome of applied ontology v standards is that the standards (OWL, RFD, SPARQL etc.) tend to have been the focus of the Semantic Web in any case.

MikeBennett: AW: See also 2nd para of their Mission Statement - 'Semantic Technologies' etc. which seems to bear this out.

==== Resolutions? ====

MikeBennett: AW: Propose we formally combine rather than simply disappear.

==== Actions ====

MikeBennett: KB will contact MG and convey the above.

MikeBennett: MB to get these notes up so KB has something to refer to.

MikeBennett: AW: The final para of their mission statement is almost directly our mission statement.

MikeBennett: MB: Would certainly want to focus on standards in e.g. finance that would make suitable business reference ontologies. There is still a need for that in e.g. Fiannce.

KenBaclawski: "Looking at the missions of SWAO and AOIS, it appears that they overlap enough that it might make sense to consider some relationship between them, possibly even a formal merger."

MikeBennett: AW: Make it more explicit that we would be looking to merge into AOIS not the other way around.

MikeBennett: AW: ' .. of SWAO into AOIS'

MikeBennett: KB proposes a joint meeting.

MikeBennett: All agree this would be good, to ensure we are all really on the same page/

=== Standards ===

AndreaW: Here is another ref to Knowledge Graphs ... https://www.zdnet.com/article/knowledge-graph-evolution-platforms-that-speak-your-language/?hss_channel=tw-224035128&=1

MikeBennett: KB: on standards - the new proposed SQL standard would include RDF capability.

MikeBennett: So this overlaps with SPARQL which was based on SQL originally. So it would effectively subsume SPARQL.

MikeBennett: Called SQL2020 (but don't Google that)

AndreaW: There is also a proposed RDF* standard that really improves reification.

AndreaW: https://www.stardog.com/blog/property-graphs-meet-stardog/

MikeBennett: MB: Thereby allowing for simpler operational ontology transformations out of 'relative things' in the conceptual ontology/

KenBaclawski: [shres transcripts from some slides]

Prospects for SQL 2020: What is going to happen inWG 3 for SQL:2020?
WG 3 identified these areas of interest for the next version of the SQL standard:
Better support for Big Data applications.
Graph queries.
Approximate queries/aggregates and uncertain data.

16

Integration of statistical packages (i.e./e.g., R).
MapReduce support.
Streaming/continuous queries.
Support for blockchains.
BASE transactions.
Any participant can bring forward a proposal for any new functionality

What is going to happen inWG 3 for SQL:2020? (cont.)
At its most recent meeting in January 2017,WG 3 discussed graph databases and query languages:
Time is right for formal standards in this area
Existing work
Technology begins to gel
Market demand

17

WG 3 is interested in property graph technology

Would like to work with LDBC (Graph QL Task Force) to develop formal standards

At the June 2017 SC 32 Plenary, WG 3 will consider:

Applying for a project split for SQL/Graph

Applying for a new work item/give notice of a preliminary new work item for a Property Graph Query* Language

* Query does not necessarily mean read-only retrieval operations only, but can include general DML/DDL operations.

MikeBennett: the above from KB is from an early 2017 slide deck

MikeBennett: Is SPARQL a property graph query language?

MikeBennett: No - more specific to RDF.

MikeBennett: AW: See also StarDog writeup on GraphQL and mapping to other things. SPARQL more tied to RDF and OWL. A graph query language does not deal with the semantics.

KenBaclawski: The source is a slide deck whose title slide is:

Standardizing Graph Database Functionality

An Invitation to Collaborate

Jan Michels, Keith Hare, JimMelton

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32/WG 3 Members

February 9, 2017

MikeBennett: This is also relevant to the Summit.

== Attendees ==

* MikeBennett
* KenBaclawski
* AndreaWesterinen

=== Apologies ===

* ToddSchneider
* BobbinTeegarden

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20200203

2020-02-03T22:04:02Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::75]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::February 3 2020 19:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00 PST/2:00pm EST
|-
| 7:00pm GMT/8:00pm CST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* Status and updates
* Naming: SIG versus Committee
* AoB
* Next Meeting

== Proceedings ==

=== Status and Updates ===

==== Naming ====

MikeBennett: EC did not get to the naming issue.

MikeBennett: So we will ignore the naming issue and continue to call ourselves the SWAO SIG.

MikeBennett: Any impact would be on labels used on the IAOA Website to navigate to our wiki page.

MikeBennett: (not a problem)

==== Other EC outcomes? ====

MikeBennett: Any other EC business on SWAO?

MikeBennett: No.

MikeBennett: Our view from last time:

MikeBennett: If something has a mission it is a SIG; if it is tasked with some ongoing delivery for the main body it is a Committee.

==== Aside: IAOA and Ontolog Forum ====

MikeBennett: KB: One thing the IAOA is reluctant to include within IAOA is the Ontolog Forum.

MikeBennett: IAOA originated from discussions on the Ontolog Forum.

MikeBennett: KB: The old archives of Ontolog Forum on CIM3 are sometimes unavailable. KB has downloaded the entire set as a potential back-up.

MikeBennett: Ideally we would remove the remaining references to CIM3 and have these link to the material on this infrastructure - a lot of work.

=== AoB? ===

==== Events ====

===== CogSima =====

MikeBennett: CogSima is coming up in May.

MikeBennett: KB considering whether to have a workshop on ontologies for situation management.

===== Ontology Summit =====

MikeBennett: Ontology Summit got off to a good start

MikeBennett: We even had one or two new people from a more tech / Semantic Tech background.

==== New IAOA SIG ====

MikeBennett: KB to contact MG about his new SIG about potentially working together or overlap / underlap.

MikeBennett: Missions are quite distinct.

MikeBennett: The new SIG is also interested in standards.

MikeBennett: MG's SIG is called Applied Ontology in Industry & Standards Committee

===== New SIG Info and Mission Statement =====

Below is a our draft description of the Applied Ontology in Industry & Standards Committee. This reflects discussion among Stefano, Michael, and myself. Stefano is the primary author, with only light editing by me.

Regards,

Amanda

Industry and Standards (I&S) Committee

-- The IAOA Industry & Standards Committee has two core purposes: (a) to foster the use of applied ontology in standardization initiatives, and (b) to facilitate the interactions across people in industry and in applied ontology research. Activities include the dissemination of information about initiatives with the aim to gather experts interested in the development of ontologically-sound standards, and the organization of virtual and physical meetings and events where to discuss how to understand and apply ontological approaches and methodologies.

Mission Statement

-- Standards may have a huge impact at the domain level, as in industry, communication and business, and on society at large. In order to better align the purpose and organization of standards, and to anticipate their consequences, it is important to improve clarity of standards and the understanding of the domains they address. The use of ontological analysis and ontology-based methodologies are important factors for the development of clear and well organized standards, and to ensure the correct understanding of their domain of application.

-- Today industry uses applications that crucially rely on semantic technologies. In the last 30 years, applied ontology has changed the way to information is understood and classified. Semantic technologies can be a decisive asset in exploitation of information potentialities in industry. This is especially true when robust and reliable information elaboration, sharing, and management are needed. The mutual discussion and interbreeding of industrial application concerns and applied ontology methodologies can improve the work of both communities and help to develop approaches better suited to understand and solve existing problems.

-- The I&S Committee aims to bring together IAOA members and people

working in industry and standards development to facilitate information

sharing as well as mutual discussion and co-ordination of activities and

resources.

Resources

-- The I&S Committee wiki serves as a collection and distribution point for information about its goals and initiatives.

-- The I&S Committee organizes the conference series Formal Ontologies Meet Industry (FOMI).

===== Discussion =====

MikeBennett: AW: Their mission statement is a lot like ours.

MikeBennett: The possible outcomes of the new group's work could include furthering the mission of this SIG.

MikeBennett: AW: Consider joining with that Committee.

MikeBennett: MB: Agree - a possible outcome of applied ontology v standards is that the standards (OWL, RFD, SPARQL etc.) tend to have been the focus of the Semantic Web in any case.

MikeBennett: AW: See also 2nd para of their Mission Statement - 'Semantic Technologies' etc. which seems to bear this out.

===== Resolutions? =====

MikeBennett: AW: Propose we formally combine rather than simply disappear.

===== Actions =====

MikeBennett: KB will contact MG and convey the above.

MikeBennett: MB to get these notes up so KB has something to refer to.

MikeBennett: AW: The final para of their mission statement is almost directly our mission statement.

MikeBennett: MB: Would certainly want to focus on standards in e.g. finance that would make suitable business reference ontologies. There is still a need for that in e.g. Fiannce.

KenBaclawski: "Looking at the missions of SWAO and AOIS, it appears that they overlap enough that it might make sense to consider some relationship between them, possibly even a formal merger."

MikeBennett: AW: Make it more explicit that we would be looking to merge into AOIS not the other way around.

MikeBennett: AW: ' .. of SWAO into AOIS'

MikeBennett: KB proposes a joint meeting.

MikeBennett: All agree this would be good, to ensure we are all really on the same page/

==== Standards ====

AndreaW: Here is another ref to Knowledge Graphs ... https://www.zdnet.com/article/knowledge-graph-evolution-platforms-that-speak-your-language/?hss_channel=tw-224035128&=1

MikeBennett: KB: on standards - the new proposed SQL standard would include RDF capability.

MikeBennett: So this overlaps with SPARQL which was based on SQL originally. So it would effectively subsume SPARQL.

MikeBennett: Called SQL2020 (but don't Google that)

AndreaW: There is also a proposed RDF* standard that really improves reification.

AndreaW: https://www.stardog.com/blog/property-graphs-meet-stardog/

MikeBennett: MB: Thereby allowing for simpler operational ontology transformations out of 'relative things' in the conceptual ontology/

KenBaclawski: Prospects for SQL 2020: What is going to happen inWG 3 for SQL:2020?

WG 3 identified these areas of interest for the next version of the SQL standard:

Better support for Big Data applications.

Graph queries.

Approximate queries/aggregates and uncertain data.

16

Integration of statistical packages (i.e./e.g., R).

MapReduce support.

Streaming/continuous queries.

Support for blockchains.

BASE transactions.

Any participant can bring forward a proposal for any new functionality

KenBaclawski: What is going to happen inWG 3 for SQL:2020? (cont.)

At its most recent meeting in January 2017,WG 3 discussed graph databases and query languages:

Time is right for formal standards in this area

Existing work

Technology begins to gel

Market demand

17

WG 3 is interested in property graph technology

Would like to work with LDBC (Graph QL Task Force) to develop formal standards

At the June 2017 SC 32 Plenary, WG 3 will consider:

Applying for a project split for SQL/Graph

Applying for a new work item/give notice of a preliminary new work item for a Property Graph Query* Language

(*) Query does not necessarily mean read-only retrieval operations only, but can include general DML/DDL operations.

MikeBennett: the above from KB is from an early 2017 slide deck

MikeBennett: Is SPARQL a property graph query language?

MikeBennett: No - more specific to RDF.

MikeBennett: AW: See also StarDog writeup on GraphQL and mapping to other things. SPARQL more tied to RDF and OWL. A graph query language does not deal with the semantics.

KenBaclawski: The source is a slide deck whose title slide is:

Standardizing Graph Database Functionality

An Invitation to Collaborate

Jan Michels, Keith Hare, JimMelton

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32/WG 3 Members

February 9, 2017

MikeBennett: This is also relevant to the Summit.

== Attendees ==

* MikeBennett
* KenBaclawski
* AndreaWesterinen

=== Apologies ===

* ToddSchneider
* BobbinTeegarden

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]

SWAO:Conference Call 20190113

2020-02-03T18:19:24Z

MikeHypercube:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left: 10px;" border="1" cellpadding="10"
|-
! scope="row" | Number
| [[sequence::74]]
|-
! scope="row" | Duration
| [[duration::1 hour]]
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="3" | Date/Time
| [[has date::January 13 2020 19:00 GMT]]
|-
| 11:00 PST/2:00pm EST
|-
| 7:00pm GMT/8:00pm CST
|-
! scope="row" | Convener
| [[convener::MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]
|}

'''IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG'''

Meetings are normally on the first Monday of the month at these times.

* We will use GoToMeeting for this meeting - details at [[SWAO:Connection Details GTM|Connection Details]]

== Agenda ==

* New members / membership (including mail list subscription)
* Report from IAOA Executive Council
*AoB

NOTE: This meeting page was not available at the time of the meeting itself.

== Proceedings ==

MikeBennett: Agenda

MikeBennett: New members / membership

MikeBennett: Report from IAOA EC

MikeBennett: Where EC = Executive Council

MikeBennett: Membership

MikeBennett: 1 how to join the mail list

MikeBennett: There IS a link on the man home page, to the mail list

MikeBennett: - no further action on wiki editing.

MikeBennett: https://wiki.iaoa.org/index.php/SWAO:Home

MikeBennett: There is also:

MikeBennett: 1 a link to contact the chairs directly...

MikeBennett: - this list is out of date

MikeBennett: 2. A link to the IAOA membership:

KenBaclawski1: https://iaoa.org/index.php/join/

MikeBennett: Also given the hiaitus its hard for people to remember if they are members

MikeBennett: Action: Update this link (MB to do that)

MikeBennett: Also update the list of people in the 'Contact Us' link

MikeBennett: Whether to include Frank Loebe on that list - ask Frank.

MikeBennett: Put wht people's positions are on that.

MikeBennett: Remove Eli Abi-Lahoud - done

MikeBennett: THe other link takes you to the 'subscribe' page as required - no further action

MikeBennett: Note: it also claims to let all members see list of all member but it does not - you get an error for that: https://listserv.ovgu.de/mailman/roster/iaoa-swao

MikeBennett: No action (3rd party stuff.

MikeBennett: KB: We should have control over that membership list

MikeBennett: Where we =

MikeBennett: The chairs (Ken and Mike)

MikeBennett: Test: This requires a separate Administrative password to ccess list admin functions

MikeBennett: TS: The chairs should have access to that

MikeBennett: all agree

MikeBennett: actin: Mail Frank Loebe (assuming he is the list admin still) to ask thats KB and MB have Admin password / access to mail list admin

MikeBennett: Membership (2): how do we get more members

MikeBennett: Now we have a simple link we can send people

MikeBennett: 2 links: the SWAO SIG page in the new stable stru cture

MikeBennett: ans the mail list subscribe

MikeBennett: MB: We should aim to send out an email (to where?) with a link to the wiki and a link to the mail list subscription page directly.

MikeBennett: Who do we mail to that?

MikeBennett: Put one out on the mail IAOA list again.

MikeBennett: Put one out on Ontolog?

MikeBennett: Commercial ones e.g.. ISWC

MikeBennett: Most conferences won't give out the mail list.

MikeBennett: TS: We should mail and ask them if they can send out something on their list.

MikeBennett: Next ISWC is November is Greece.

MikeBennett: Who to mail with that

MikeBennett: Someone at MIT

MikeBennett: Lalana Kagal

CSAIL MIT

Cambridge, USA

MikeBennett: Other events?

MikeBennett: Scope = events relating to our remit which is anythign in Semantic Web and / or Applied Ontology

MikeBennett: EDW

MikeBennett: Dataversity

MikeBennett: EDM Council.

MikeBennett: OMG (Ontology PSIG or OMG generally)

MikeBennett: VMBO

MikeBennett: BT: Is there is a group NIST

MikeBennett: Value Modeling and Business Ontology (VMBO) is where the REA folks hang out.

MikeBennett: Do as a press release or as a more informal email?

MikeBennett: ore informal email seems more appropriate.

MikeBennett: IOF

MikeBennett: TS can sen the email to them.

MikeBennett: ACtions - the various people who have linkss to those things above, to send the email to the.

MikeBennett: Ogther places:

MikeBennett: Semantic Arts

MikeBennett: Top Quadrant, Franz

MikeBennett: StarDog

MikeBennett: Cambridge Semantics (Marty Loughlin)

MikeBennett: agnos.io and / or The Knowledge Graph Foundation

MikeBennett: The email just needs to be whatever sounds right, plus description of the grou plus 2 links: 1. the wiki page 2 the Mail list subscripton list

MikeBennett: Not the agnos.io in Maimi by a group in London that MB knows

MikeBennett: 2. Report back from the IAOA EC

MikeBennett: KB: At last EC meeting the IAOA discussed moving away from the term SIG, as not very descrptive of these groups.

MikeBennett: Leaning toward 'Technical Committee' or possible 'Scientific Committee'

MikeBennett: The distinction was that e.g. the EC has a mandate to accomplish some specific task. A purpose (in their case, to produce the Glossary of terms in the field). The EC has other things it also covers courses and books, among other educational matters.

MikeBennett: The Ed Ctee is also responsible for making some meetings exist list FOIS

MikeBennett: The meetings thing is done by the Exec Ctee (EC) NOt the Edu Ctee (EC).

MikeBennett: THe poibt being, these groups have tasks to perform that are delegated from the Exec Ctee.

MikeBennett: SWAO does not have that characteristic - we are not performing a task delegated to us from the Exec Ctee.

ToddSchneider: From the charter "... promote communication, this SIG is event-focused."

MikeBennett: Since the Special Issue, we haven't been engaged in specific activity in relation to our stated mission.

MikeBennett: We are defined as having a mission (rather than a task or set of tasks).

MikeBennett: That is normal for SIGs

MikeBennett: MB we want to try and get people to join otherwise we are a group are not doing very much.

MikeBennett: TS: Conversely it is hard to get people to join if we do not have many things going on.

MikeBennett: What is the distinction that IAOA were trying to articulate?

MikeBennett: Are they saying we should be more like the Edu Ctee?

MikeBennett: No.

MikeBennett: The IAOA were asking if there should be a different kind of name for this group

MikeBennett: TS did they identify in those discussions what kind of distinction they intended.

MikeBennett: Ontologically, we have a group that is defined by having a mission statement, rather than being delegated with a task.

MikeBennett: If we do think there should be groups that are defined by a mission statement, then what you call it is a separate question.

MikeBennett: MB these are separate questions to the real ones:

MikeBennett: 1. Whether IAOA has bodies identified by their mission statement

MikeBennett: 2. Whether the one such that is SWAO, remains viable in terms of being able to pursue its stated goals

MikeBennett: TS: A idea: what if we have a remit to talk about how to implement something in applcations.

MikeBennett: That is the word Applied Ontology differs from the commonly understood notion of 'applied'.

MikeBennett: There is a new (not SIG) started by Michael Gruninger. Something closer to IOF in its remit. Relates to standards and industrial practice.

ToddSchneider: 'Applied Ontology in Industry and Standards'

ToddSchneider: The motivations for Applied Ontology (semantic integration, decision support, search) are daily challenges for industry. IAOA has recently proposed the creation of a new Special Interest Group called Applied Ontology in Industry and Standardization (AOIS). The mission of this new SIG is to promote the adoption of ontologies and ontological analysis within industry.

MikeBennett: MB: Let's give ourselves one cycle (3 months?) to deliver some kind of results, and then disband if not

MikeBennett: THe question is one about whether or not we continue, not whether it is called a SIG.

MikeBennett: Also whether we overlap with Gruninger's new group described above. AOIS.

MikeBennett: They are calling it a SIG at the moment, in the above.

MikeBennett: So let's not change the name from SIG

MikeBennett: BT: Also Committee is more organization, whereas a SIG is focused on content.

MikeBennett: BT: SIG matches people's expectations of what this group is.

== Attendees ==

* MikeBennett
* BobbinTeegarden
* Ken Baclawski
* Todd Schneider

=== Apologies ===

== Next Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::>>{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]] |?|
mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=asc| format=ul| limit=3}}
== Previous Meetings ==
{{#ask: [[Category:SWAO]] [[Category:Conference_Call]] [[has date::<<{{#show:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|?has date}}]]
|?|mainlabel=-|sort=has date |order=desc| format=ul| limit=3}}

[[Category:SWAO| ]]
[[Category:Conference_Call| ]]