ppy/chat-transcript_20091210e_raw.txt ------------- At the chat-room: AmandaVizedom ArturoSanchez BarrySmith BartGajderowicz BillHogan BonnieSwart BorisShvedin1 BruceBray CameronRoss EdDodds ElizabethFlorescu FrankOlken Gary Berg-Cross JeffAbbott Joel Natividad JoelBender John Schlichter JuliaBermejoAlonso KenBaclawski KurtConrad Laurent - OASIS MaryBrady Matthew Lange Meika Ungricht MichaelGruninger PatCassidy PavithraKenjige Peter B Andersen PeterYim RaviSharma RexBrooks SteveRay Stuart Turner TerryLongstreth Tracy Safran SAIC/EVS ------------- == very lightly edited transcript of the chat-session: == anonymous morphed into John Schlichter John Schlichter: What is the URL for the presentation? Joel Natividad: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2009_12_10#nid23MX Joel Natividad: click on each item enclosed in brackets in Slides bullet John Schlichter: thank you PPY morphed into PeterYim anonymous1 morphed into Meika Ungricht PeterYim: Welcome to the Thu 2009-12-10 . Launch Event for OntologySummit2010: "Creating the Ontologists of the Future" * Co-chairs: Dr. SteveRay & Professor BarrySmith (Ontology Summit 2010 General Co-chair) (23GA) * Panelists: o Content Track: + Present: ArturoSanchez, AntonyGalton (24ZC) + Future: LeoObrst, MichaelGruninger (24ZD) o Quality Track: + Present: ArturoSanchez, AntonyGalton (24ZF) + Future: BarrySmith, NicolaGuarino, FabianNeuhaus (24ZG) o Professional Context Track: + Present: AmandaVizedom, RalphHodgson (24ZI) + Future: ElizabethFlorescu, PeterYim (24ZJ) . session page: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2009_12_10 . anonymous2 morphed into KurtConrad anonymous1 morphed into Tracy Safran NCICB/EVS John Schlichter: has joined the concall. Laurent morphed into Laurent - OASIS Laurent - OASIS: Unfortunately I'm simultaneously on a budget call, but will be in this chat room if needed. anonymous1 morphed into Rex Brooks anonymous morphed into Peter B Andersen ArturoSanchez: FrankOlken: I have joined the conference call. anonymous1 morphed into Cameron Ross anonymous: Elizabeth joined, but I don't know how to enter my name... FrankOlken: Just a reminder to NSF PI's: CISE small proposals are due on Dec. 17, 2009. JoelBender: Elizabeth: there is a "settings" button at the top, click it. JoelBender: There is an option there for your name. anonymous morphed into Elizabeth ArturoSanchez: @anonymous: press Settings Elizabeth morphed into ElizabethFlorescu anonymous morphed into Stuart Turner anonymous2 morphed into BarrySmith Rex Brooks morphed into RexBrooks Mary Brady morphed into MaryBrady Cameron Ross morphed into CameronRoss Joel Natividad: Gents, can you confirm that the VNC shared screen is up? Bill Hogan morphed into BillHogan anonymous morphed into PavithraKenjige RaviSharma: Yes Joel ArturoSanchez: @Joel Natividad: it seems VNC is not up this time ... ask Peter RaviSharma: Joel RaviSharma: Please put in password after you open the VNC in a new Window some company firewalls do not allow so download the slides and open them please ArturoSanchez: ArturoSanchez: @Joel Natividad: I take it back ... it is up ... Tracy Safran NCICB/EVS morphed into Tracy Safran SAIC/EVS Joel Natividad: @Arturo,Ravi:thanks ArturoSanchez: @SteveRay: or say an expletive RaviSharma: Barry PeterYim: Barry, we cannot hear you RaviSharma: Are you able to see this please unmute #3 Peter B Andersen: None of the phone numbers I have tried seems to be correct. Has any one else had this problem? RaviSharma: #3 RaviSharma: STAR 3 John Schlichter: Darn. I missed the intro because I had to answer the door. ArturoSanchez: @PeterYim: I hear OK ... AmandaVizedom: Steve, you are fading in and out to me Tracy Safran SAIC/EVS: No problems hearing either of you John Schlichter: The presenter is hard to hear. John Schlichter: Peter is easy to hear, but Steve is not. BarrySmith: I am hearing you, but you seem not to be hearing me. - BS RaviSharma: Berry please press *3 ArturoSanchez: Yes! ArturoSanchez: Excellent! anonymous morphed into Mycoyne PeterYim: we seem to have vnc problem too ... please run the slides on your desktops RaviSharma: Berry: I agree that Ontology basics from different viewpoints should be a common awareness baseline curriculum. ArturoSanchez: indeed ... anonymous morphed into BorisShvedin1 John Schlichter: Barry commented that ontology should not be confused with semiotics or Wittgenstein-ian language games. Should it not be confused with phenomenology as well, or is that a relevant intellectual history? RaviSharma: Barry: However I am not in favor of restricting the access to ontolog forum except by whatever moderation that peter so kindly provides. We have to laud Peter's efforts at keeping the forum transparent and open to the World at large. What perhaps you are meaning is that those who claim some certification etc can have a more restricted forum such as certified ontologists. I have for example no formal training in Ontology and i am happy to operate in open forum. If I submit a paper, it has to be refereed etc and there are mechanisms to restrict or filter contributions. I recommend to keep Ontolog Forum Open. RaviSharma: Peter: please update VNC RaviSharma: Arturo: we have to search and explore and interpret different curriculae which most likely often are part of some domain based curriculae and also combine them with onto specific curriculae to get a canvas of current state. AmandaVizedom: Don't worry, John and Ravi -- there will be *plenty* of discussion about what the content, measures, and delivery of ontological competence are & should be. Barry shared his motivation with us, but it is important for all to know that motivations across the Organizing Committee are quite varied, and all expect similar variation among participants. I hope that we can discuss these, but also - essentially - move past them to make progress on the training/education development goals we have in common. RaviSharma: Leo and Mike: Why are you excluding a Ph.D. Program in Ontology whether it is coupled with knowledge type adjectives? anonymous morphed into JeffAbbott RaviSharma: Mike: John Schlichter: Amanda: thanks. Just trying to orient my listening. Joel Natividad: Peter, Steve: I can hear Steve quite well Joel Natividad: Perhaps, its on your end BartGajderowicz: I hear the static as well. BruceBray: no problem hearing Steve from my end John Schlichter: I can hear everyone fine now. RexBrooks: I'm also having no trouble hearing Steve. John Schlichter: Well, the presenter just disapeared. CameronRoss: A lot of baseline static here. Mycoyne: Now, I cannot hear anything.. ElizabethFlorescu: it seems that the line got cut???? MichaelGruninger: @Ravi: We are not exlcuding PhD programme; that was a small oversight in the slides Gary Berg-Cross: I can hear everyone. RexBrooks: I'm now also not hearing anyone but Peter, Frank and a few others. SteveRay: I've lost contact also. Mycoyne: Yes I can hear steve SteveRay: Can't hear Arturo. ArturoSanchez: Can you hear me?? CameronRoss: all clear now BartGajderowicz: The static just disappeared for me as well. John Schlichter: I seem to hear everyone except Arturo. SteveRay: Can't hear Arturo ArturoSanchez: It seems I need to call again ... move to another track ... RaviSharma: Mike: We need Domain based such as Supply chain, Mfg, Financial and other practical domains clinical practices and also professional tracks such as biology, medicine , physics etc. FrankOlken: I can hear Steve Ray, Peter Yim, Michael Gruninger, .... but not Arturo. RaviSharma: Barry: can you hear steve? SteveRay: Barry is now presenting. Joel Natividad: +1 to Ravi's point about domains. Also, what about work on standardizing domain-specific upper ontologies BartGajderowicz: Which slides / page is Barry presenting from? ArturoSanchez: I am back ... I can hear Barry ... but need to check if people will be able to hear me ... let me know ... JoelBender: @Bart: OntologySummit2010-Launch_Quality-Track--BarrySmith-NicolaGuarino-FabianNeuhaus_20091210 SteveRay: Barry is on slide #2 RaviSharma: Bart Page 2 SteveRay: Arturo, I will introduce you once Barry is finished. Joel Natividad: @Bart: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2010/2009-12-10_LaunchEvent/OntologySummit2010-Launch_Quality-Track--BarrySmith-NicolaGuarino-FabianNeuhaus_20091210.pdf BartGajderowicz: thank you anonymous morphed into JuliaBermejoAlonso SteveRay: Slide #3 RaviSharma: Peter VNC does not work? BartGajderowicz: Slides: OntologySummit2010-Launch_Present-Curricular-Quality-Tracks--ArturoSanchez-AntonyGalton_20091210.pdf AmandaVizedom: @John. Roger that. I would hate for anyone to think that they should not contribute, or stick with the Summit over the next few months, because of disagreement with Barry's position (he will be the first to say it is a controversial one). The work we will be doing over the duration of the summit is fundamentally critical and collaborative. IMNSHO, the breadth and depth of that critical collaboration is essential. Diversity of experience is a significant factor in whether the Summit produces something that moves the field of ontology forward. RaviSharma: Barry: I think we have concentrated effectively on creating a practice out of what was earlier very spotty presence encompassing almost many many disciplines, e.g. philosophy, math, physics, computer logic, bio, various other communities including search and discovery, databases people from many walks. Your efforts are praiseworthy to create an academic and professional certification tracks and hopefully these will be recognized by academic bodies to design new curriculae around them. RaviSharma: Yes Amanda ArturoSanchez: @RaviSharma: thank you Ravi ... in your suggestion you are mixing present with future. The stance we propose we take is to first see what is out there, and also propose what we think should be out there ... your point is well taken anonymous morphed into Matthew Lange John Schlichter: Amanda: I don't find Barry's thesis controversial. I prefer learning to being right. I appreciate a distinction between ontology as metaphysics and ontology information science. The latter grew from the former. In this regard, I wonder what Barry's comment meant that we should disregard "irrelevant philosophical games". PeterYim: @Amanda: one interesting question would be ... "how are expectations from ontologists different from those of knowledge engineers of the past?" Joel Natividad: @Amanda: I have so many war stories being a practitioner. Can you share your contact info? RaviSharma: Amanda: Yes I agree, today we have to search for people today by first knowing whether they have worked with known institutions, tools or individuals, and now I have view access to your slides, I agree with your slides. However do you not agree that we have to have a roadmap or canvas of knowledge-ontology-science-logic-philosophy&logic etc and practices from DARPA, Europe and Other US Knowledge initaitives from multiple dimensions, then we can also create strategies for where the gaps are needs are and where the efforts should be. John Schlichter: Ontology is taught in some universities as Philosophy. This is less the case in America, which has sucumbed to the Analytic school and focuses on language games, and used to be more common in Europe (Continental Philosophy). This developed into very practical scientific methods for practicing ontology. Thus there are already relevant curriculums. anonymous morphed into EdDodds RexBrooks: Don't we need to understand the marketplace in the sense of educating that marketplace about the potential value of ontologists? AmandaVizedom: @Joel Yes, and a tip for you and others looking for Ontolog member contact info: Looking at the Wiki page for the session, you'll see that many names are hyperlinks. Click on the name and you will get the person's profile. Many folks, including me, have contact info on there (slightly obfuscated to prevent spambot harvesting). RaviSharma: Elizabeth and Peter: Do you think a narrative section or some comment section for justifying or explaining the rationale for their choices on this questionaire would provide reasoning tracking capability of their answers? RexBrooks: Who is the audience and are they ready to understand the value of ontology? RaviSharma: Elizabeth & Peter: explaining reaoning is important to create a case based reasoning type automtion for the future ontology analyses. RexBrooks: Yes that was addressed to the speaker. RexBrooks: How can a questionnaire help us understand this readiness. AmandaVizedom: @Peter: indeed, I will add this. Also, it calls to mind another: Is there any consistent relationship between job labels (ontologist | knowledge engineer | ontological engineer | concept modeler | ...) and activities/skills? RaviSharma: Rex: I think it at least starts with peergroup capture of current state of ontology training and curriculum awareness. MichaelGruninger: @Ravi : Yes, I mentioned the notion of streams for industrial application areas at the end of my presentation (although it wasn't explicitly on the slides) RexBrooks: I accept that, Ravi, but we also need to push it out beyond that. ElizabethFlorescu: to RaviSharma: yes, the reasoning adds a lot of information on the present and future developments ElizabethFlorescu: to RexBrooks: the audience at this point is the ontology community itself; but the results, digested and integrated in the final document will be directed to the audience of this summit's audience RaviSharma: Amanda: thanks, I agree we will have more time to discus these during this period. RaviSharma: Peter: What are the different ways such as articles, presentations, by which we can participate and contribute to this summit from now on? BonnieSwart: Shouldn't we have an "ontology professional" ontology? We could model each track's topics from the perspective of the ontologist: education, certification, skills, employers and organizations, projects, etc. RaviSharma: Bonnie great idea. I agree even if do not have a full solution, at least it will demo power of logic and relationships. EdDodds: For building the "value case", analysts at institutional investment houses need to be targeted for education so that firms recognized as utilizing ontologies will be seen as more efficient (and then, by extension, more profitable). ArturoSanchez: @BonnieSwart: good point Bonnie! We actually talked about that and started putting a draft concept map together. We invested much time in trying to come to agree on names for concepts and relationships, and realized that for the purpose of eliciting the structure of the summit it was probably an over-kill. However, if you are interested, this would be a neat and useful contribution. Are you willing to contribute with this? RaviSharma: Rex: Peergroup input and technology forecasting methods such as old DELPHI etc? this certainly needs to capture reasoning behind practicing professionals logic and reasoning in depicting current and future projections. TerryLongstreth: @Ravi&Bonnie; sounds like could become an ACM Special Interest Group (SIGONTO?) RaviSharma: Arturo:I would like to provide inputs to this effort and collaborate. AmandaVizedom: @John: Like Barry, I am a philosopher by training. As you may guess, we might be seen as representing very different schools of thought (and, I believe, different subfields). We share a deep commitment to formal correctness and logical roots. Perhaps as a consequence of different philosophical stances, we often differ regarding how elements of the working context *should* or *should not* change the very nature of quality and correctness generally, and the skills needed. John Schlichter: Examples where ontology is being used? How about analysis of cyber activity and social networks to gauge intentions and threats? RaviSharma: Great comment from the speaker(?) the very observation disturbs the experiment's current state, except for thought experiments of Einstein? AmandaVizedom: A side effect of the Professional Context survey might well be a better sense of the running projects that use ontology. John Schlichter: Amanda: Like you and barry, I too am a philosopher by training. Also am a management consultant by training and vocation. Ontology became an operational science in the 1930's with works like Husserl's "Crisis of the European Sciences" which outlined the phenomenological technique as the foundation of modern science. Those are the techniques that have evolved into ontology as information science focusing on the formal representation of a set of concepts within a domain and the relationships between those concepts. Joel Natividad: Another example: We're using it for semantic integration at a major pharma of several datasources - think of it as Enterprise Application Integration 2.0 (3.0?) BonnieSwart: @ Arturo & Ravi: Yes, I'd be happy to collaborate with Ravi and anyone else who would be interested in creating an ontologist ontology. (My very first ontology was an "ontology" ontology, so there's a neat alignment with the idea of building an "ontologist" ontology!) RaviSharma: Barry and Amanda: There are many Ontology based applications in Bio, Bioinformatics (genetics) and Medicine (SNOMED) and many new initiatives in NIC, NIH etc. But I feel even there we do not clearly understand how to integrate or interoperate different levels or cross ontology practices? EdDodds: There are many business folks who understand the value of taxonomies -- and I think can be persuaded that, by analog, ontologies will be beneficial. John Schlichter: To Barry's original point, a way to advance ontology is to distinguish what ontology is not. RaviSharma: Yes Thanks Peter. AmandaVizedom: @EdDodds -- Indeed! As I learned at Taxonomy Boot Camp a few weeks ago, and learned much about the road from there. I was pleased to learn of the extent to which folks in that world are reaching up the semantic spectrum on their own. ArturoSanchez: @Bonnie & Ravi: great! Please, do collaborate on that ... and--if you do not mind--keep me in the loop as I am very interested in the exercise ... my contact is on the slides I presented today and also on my Ontolog entry. I also see Ravi's contact at his Ontolog entry, but do not see yours. EdDodds: The push toward international accounting standards, xbrl is a current situation which can be used as a teaching example of a community becoming aware of the utility of a standardized taxonomy/description approach. BonnieSwart: @John: one of the first topics I address when introducing any ontology-based idea is titled "What is an Ontology and, More Importantly, What isn't". Tracy Safran SAIC/EVS: Is there a central wiki with information on people/projects/training? John Schlichter: @Bonnie: do you have a presentation on that topic? RaviSharma: Arturo: Thanks and Steve Ray many thanks. RaviSharma: Also Berry many thanks. ArturoSanchez: @Ravi: my pleasure. BonnieSwart: @Arturo: I keep forgetting to update my wiki page -- I'll put my info up later today. John Schlichter: @Amanda: thanks. Please connect with me at jschlichter-at-opmexperts.com. AmandaVizedom: @Bonnie, Ravi, John: Yes. It's important to know, though, that many people have advanced such models, mostly based on a particular theory or opinion exclusively. We need the critical collaboration to get an more informed answer. ArturoSanchez: @Bonnie&Ravi: Great! look forward to cooperating with both of you Joel Natividad: @Peter: To the wiki question, will there be a new purple wiki using PMWX/SMW (as a sem wiki advocate) for the initiative? PeterYim: @Joel ... yes, PSMW (purple semantic media wiki) ... that's the plan ... Ken Baclawski's team (NEU) and my team (CIM3) are working on content migration now SteveRay: Thanks for your participation. Talk to you all soon. ArturoSanchez: @all: gotta go now ... great session ... thanks y'all BonnieSwart: @John: not really; I usually address the "What isn't" part in one or two slides, tailored to a specific audience. PeterYim: Thank you, everyone ... great session ... bye! Joel Natividad: plaudits to all the speakers, and especially to Peter! PeterYim: Thanks, Joel.