Difference between revisions of "Water Cluster Telecons"
(→Topics) |
(→Notes) |
||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
===Notes=== | ===Notes=== | ||
| − | |||
| − | + | '''Water Telecon – April 1, 2010''' | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| + | '''Present''' | ||
| + | Bill Sonntag | ||
| + | Brian Rogan | ||
| + | Carol Meyer | ||
| + | Luis Bermudez | ||
| + | Bruce Bargemeyer | ||
| + | Jami Montgomery | ||
| − | '''Review of last call''' | + | '''Review of notes from last call''' |
| + | There was a brief discussion of the notes from the last call | ||
| − | + | '''Discussion of use case development, status of discussions with Gulf of Maine programs''' | |
| + | Bill spent time last week talking with people about the use case development. The drought scenarios are moving forward quickly according to Will Pozzi. They are using the work of CUASHI and HydroSeek and adding to it. It is hoped that there can be a finalized use case scenario for the Gulf of Maine soon. There are some significant developments: | ||
| + | *MMI has been involved in the Gulf of Maine for a significant amount of time | ||
| + | *Go MOOS has just gotten a new grant from the EPA as the lead in a multi state proposal. It has been approved. They have become GoMRI | ||
| + | *The interest in the ecoinformatics process as an institution in North America ties in as well. | ||
| − | |||
| − | + | '''AIP-3 Process update''' | |
| − | + | We currently have the capability of getting something in by May 3 to GEO. While it may not work for the ministerial meeting there are some already selected for that meeting. | |
| + | '''Semantic ontology management - path forward''' | ||
| − | + | Previous work to build a semantic architecture was a bit optimistic that it could be done quickly but it needs to continue to be worked on. | |
| − | |||
| − | + | One big question is how do we manage ontologies. | |
| + | We have not gotten to the point where we are picking management schemes in the water domain. | ||
| − | + | In other informatics context, we have had a chance to look at the Stanford BioPortal. Luis feels that this the cornerstone of work at MMI | |
| − | |||
| − | + | We are setting the stage to demonstrate the utility of an array of registries that will work for us. We are in a wait and see on the use case at this point. | |
| + | Bill is proposing that the group have deliberations on some of the utilities. At the ESIP meeting, we can have a workshop to get the APIs and start to do some experiments with them to see how they serve us. | ||
| − | + | Bruce has been looking at the BioPortal and MMI portal to track evolutionary patterns. He is finding the MMI is using the backend of BioPortal. He is hoping that it can keep up. | |
| + | He feels that it will be similar to XMR in the future. | ||
| − | + | Richard Hooper was going to expand the ontology used in HydroSeek. Greg Ondich who is doing work for Gary Foley is also doing some ontology work and he is working with him to point out the work that has already been done. | |
| − | |||
| − | + | Bruce wants to be sure the onotology work is coordinated between the different groups. | |
| + | Luis wondered if this can be folded into the AIP initiative | ||
| − | + | Bill mentioned that there is a potential to work with the ontologies group headed by Peter Fox to have a collaborative effort at the Summer Meeting. | |
| + | There would be a series of demonstrations of portals that could occur during the next telecons leading up to the meeting. | ||
| − | + | We need to determine what can be accomplished between now and July and we need to reach out to the semantics group to see what we can do. There is also work that can be done with the Decisions cluster. | |
| − | |||
| − | + | What are the difficult questions that still need to be answered? It is worth trying to establish this list before moving forward. | |
| − | + | Scientists want to know for a particular time when something passes a particular point and compare it to previous data. It helps to be able to determine how well the buoys or other sensors are working. | |
| − | + | Bill will be sending around an email to compile a series of questions for the next conversation. | |
| − | + | '''Activities for ESIP Summer meeting''' | |
| + | Interest in reaching out to the other groups and see what kind of collaborations can created. | ||
| − | '''Other topics | + | '''Other topics''' |
| − | There were no other suggested | + | There were no other topics suggested. |
| − | + | The meeting was adjourned at 3:45 PM | |
===Action Items=== | ===Action Items=== | ||
==[[Previous Telecons]]== | ==[[Previous Telecons]]== | ||
Revision as of 14:47, April 1, 2010
| Main ESIP page >> Main Water Clusterpage |
April 1 2010 Telecon
3 pm EST
Phone: Meeting Number: 877-326-0011
Meeting Code: *7884944*
Topics
- Review of notes from last call
- Discussion of use case development, status of discussions with Gulf of Maine programs
- AIP-3 Process update
- Semantic ontology management - path forward
- Activities for ESIP Summer meeting
- Other topics (please make a suggestion)
- Adjournment
- Date of next Teleconference
Meeting Docs
Notes
Water Telecon – April 1, 2010
Present Bill Sonntag Brian Rogan Carol Meyer Luis Bermudez Bruce Bargemeyer Jami Montgomery
Review of notes from last call
There was a brief discussion of the notes from the last call
Discussion of use case development, status of discussions with Gulf of Maine programs Bill spent time last week talking with people about the use case development. The drought scenarios are moving forward quickly according to Will Pozzi. They are using the work of CUASHI and HydroSeek and adding to it. It is hoped that there can be a finalized use case scenario for the Gulf of Maine soon. There are some significant developments:
- MMI has been involved in the Gulf of Maine for a significant amount of time
- Go MOOS has just gotten a new grant from the EPA as the lead in a multi state proposal. It has been approved. They have become GoMRI
- The interest in the ecoinformatics process as an institution in North America ties in as well.
AIP-3 Process update
We currently have the capability of getting something in by May 3 to GEO. While it may not work for the ministerial meeting there are some already selected for that meeting.
Semantic ontology management - path forward
Previous work to build a semantic architecture was a bit optimistic that it could be done quickly but it needs to continue to be worked on.
One big question is how do we manage ontologies.
We have not gotten to the point where we are picking management schemes in the water domain.
In other informatics context, we have had a chance to look at the Stanford BioPortal. Luis feels that this the cornerstone of work at MMI
We are setting the stage to demonstrate the utility of an array of registries that will work for us. We are in a wait and see on the use case at this point.
Bill is proposing that the group have deliberations on some of the utilities. At the ESIP meeting, we can have a workshop to get the APIs and start to do some experiments with them to see how they serve us.
Bruce has been looking at the BioPortal and MMI portal to track evolutionary patterns. He is finding the MMI is using the backend of BioPortal. He is hoping that it can keep up.
He feels that it will be similar to XMR in the future.
Richard Hooper was going to expand the ontology used in HydroSeek. Greg Ondich who is doing work for Gary Foley is also doing some ontology work and he is working with him to point out the work that has already been done.
Bruce wants to be sure the onotology work is coordinated between the different groups.
Luis wondered if this can be folded into the AIP initiative
Bill mentioned that there is a potential to work with the ontologies group headed by Peter Fox to have a collaborative effort at the Summer Meeting.
There would be a series of demonstrations of portals that could occur during the next telecons leading up to the meeting.
We need to determine what can be accomplished between now and July and we need to reach out to the semantics group to see what we can do. There is also work that can be done with the Decisions cluster.
What are the difficult questions that still need to be answered? It is worth trying to establish this list before moving forward.
Scientists want to know for a particular time when something passes a particular point and compare it to previous data. It helps to be able to determine how well the buoys or other sensors are working.
Bill will be sending around an email to compile a series of questions for the next conversation.
Activities for ESIP Summer meeting
Interest in reaching out to the other groups and see what kind of collaborations can created.
Other topics
There were no other topics suggested.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:45 PM
