SWTeleconNotes20120626
From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
Attendance
- Hook Hua
- Erin Robinson
- Eric Rozell
- Nancy Hoebelheinrich
- Robert Downs
- Ruth Duerr
- Chris Lynnes
- Mark Parsons
- Thomas Huang
- Peter Fox (late)
- Call-in User_1
- Call-in User_3
- Call-in User_5
Action Items
Bioportal @ ORNL
- We should get a list of potential ontologies to pass to Lin
- Are there some criteria for what a "shareable ontology" might be?
- An entry barrier to getting ontologies in may be too preventative
- Should this focus on micro-ontologies (small, reusable components)?
- What is the distinction between ESIP Commons and ontology portal?
- ESIP Commons may ingest portal
- The ontology portal is a source of advertising for your ontology
- The portal comes with all kinds of tools for visualizing, querying, etc.
- Is there a use case that is supposed to be solved using the ontology portal?
- i.e., should they be targeted at a specific kind of use (can an ontology be too specific?)
- The portal will provide a functional infrastructure for the SW Cluster to review/find ontologies
- We want to foster sharing, and limit the overhead for sharing
- List of initial ontologies:
- Ruth: 5 sea ice and sea ice data related ontologies
- Beth: initial ontology for data products as ASDC
- Chris: DQSS ontology, MSDA ontology
- Should there be an engineering practices associated with the portal? (e.g., versioning)
- Is it even possible to follow a consistent versioning across all of ESIP?
- As an ESIP cluster should we put together a best practices, including:
- Versioning
- Namespaces
- Modularity
- etc.
- Idea is to collaboratively modify an ontology as well.
- One of the key benefits of the Semantic Web is to connect data across organizational structures
SWEET and GCMD discussion
- Where is SWEET going next?
- Is there a formal governance model for SWEET?
