|Duration||1 hour60 minute |
|Date/Time||February 3 2020 19:00 GMT|
|11:00 PST/2:00pm EST|
|7:00pm GMT/8:00pm CST|
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 Connection Details
- Status and updates
- Naming: SIG versus Committee
- Next Meeting
Status and Updates
MikeBennett: CogSima is coming up in May.
MikeBennett: KB considering whether to have a workshop on ontologies for situation management.
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.
Discussion of the new AOIS group
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: Propose we formally combine rather than simply disappear.
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/
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.
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.
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
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.