HCLSIG/SWANSIOC/Meetings/2009-04-03 Conference Call

From W3C Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Conference Details

  • Date of Call: Friday April 3, 2009
  • Time of Call: 11:00am Eastern Time
  • Dial-In #: +1.617.761.6200 (Cambridge, MA)
  • Dial-In #: + (Nice, France)
  • Dial-In #: +44.117.370.6152 (Bristol, UK)
  • Participant Access Code: 4257 ("HCLS")
  • IRC Channel: irc.w3.org port 6665 channel #HCLS (see W3C IRC page for details, or see Web IRC)
  • Duration: ~1 hour
  • Convener: Tim Clark
  • Scribe: Susie


  • Task Reports (brief)
  • Plan Goals for F2F


Attendees: Tim, Alan, AnnaMaria, David, Paolo, Alex, JohnB, Susie

<Susie> Start with updates, and then discuss the F2F

<Susie> John Breslin: Will be at the first part of the F2F

<Susie> Tim: Paolo will be at the F2F

<Susie> Tim: Susie will be at the F2F

<Susie> Tim: F2F is excellent for high bandwidth interaction

<Susie> Tim: Update from Paolo and Alex on IG Note

<Susie> Paolo: Started with the writing

<Susie> Document is available on the Web

<Susie> Discusses integration of SIOC and SWAN

<Susie> Paolo: Draft finished in time for the F2F

<Susie> Tim: Will that be all three documents

<Susie> Tim: SWAN modifications, SIOC modifications, and SWAN/SIOC mapping

<paolo_ciccarese> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/hcls/notes/swan/

<Susie> Tim: Should we allocate time at the F2F to discuss the documents

<Susie> Paolo: People will need time to read the documents first, so not sure if it'll be a good thing to do at the F2F

<Susie> Alex: I won't be at the F2F

<Susie> Alex: Might make sense to provide an update on the documents

<Susie> Tim: When will you be ready for comments?

<Susie> Paolo: Will email group when ready for comments

<Susie> Tim: Possibility of Lilly getting involved in integration of experiment ontology

<Susie> Susie: We've written the business justification and submitted it into the system

<Susie> Susie: Will ask Yimin if he's heard anything

<Susie> Susie: Asked for 3 months of Yimin's time

<Susie> F2F

<Susie> Tim: Had wanted John Madden to join the Sci Discourse breakout

<Susie> Tim: Had discussion with Kei yesterday

<Susie> Tim: Talked about integrating BioRDF, Scientific Discourse, and Terminology

<Susie> Tim: Would this be a useful discussion for the F2F

<Susie> Susie: More details?

<Susie> Tim: BioRDF is about making linked data from well understood repositories, e.g. genes, proteins

<Susie> Tim: Terminology is representing how scientists refer to different things

<Susie> Tim: Terminology has a more transitory status

<Susie> Tim: Terminologies are not necessarily ontologies

<Susie> Tim: Discourse is talking about sentences, and claims and assertions

<Susie> Tim: This is how these things integrate normally in a scientific paper

<Susie> Susie: LODD is looking to use consistent ontologies for mapping to RDF

<Susie> Susie: LODD also wants to include unstructured data about what patients are saying about drugs

<Susie> Tim: Need to understand role of terminology and ontology

<Susie> Paolo: We need to refer to ontologies in SWAN

<Susie> Paolo: However, the ontologies don't always make sense

<Susie> Paolo: Will create terminologies where there are gaps

<Susie> Paolo: Could upgrade to an ontology when possible

<Susie> Paolo: Looking at SKOS for modeling terminologies

<Susie> Paolo: Using MOAT

<AlexPassant> MOAT: http://moat-project.org/

<Susie> Paolo: Using MOAT for a consistent framework for tagging to meaning

<Susie> Paolo: Work with biologists - and people with other backgrounds - and people not prepared to develop ontologies

<Susie> Paolo: People are happy with taxonomies, and they are useful for them

<Susie> Paolo: If create taxonomies to OWL then the reasoning gets mixed up

<Susie> Paolo: So are starting with SKOS

<Susie> Tim: Addressing problem of impedance mismatch between biologists and ontologists

<Susie> Paolo: Sometimes not interested in converting bunch of terms into OWL

<Susie> Paol: Propose lightweight approach for user

<Susie> Tim: Do we enable the Semantic Web for biology by creating formal models for everything

<Susie> Tim: I would assert not

<Susie> Tim: Discourse model could be well defined in OWL, but still allow lots of space to say what you want

<Susie> Tim: If force scientists to use an ontology then we'd scare them away

<Susie> Tim: Point scientists to what's known as well as activities that involve data

<Susie> Tim: It's an activity system

<Susie> Tim: Spend time at F2F working on activities that tie discourse and experiments to terminology/ontology

<Susie> Susie: Sometimes users are in read-only mode and sometimes write-mode

<Susie> Susie: May only interact with ontology in write-mode

<Susie> Paolo: Many models in which scientists interact with data

<Susie> Paolo: Could have further discussions

<Susie> Paolo: In SWAN, create interfaces that have specification systems, but don't want to force scientists to use a structure

<Susie> Paolo: Working on specification and mappings, but haven't worked on interface yet

<Susie> Tim: Scientists think according to gene, species, etc.

<Susie> Tim: Because biology is observationally based

<Susie> Tim: Propose at F2F to think about year long roadmap, and how can integrate with other HCLS groups

<Susie> Alan: Good idea to look at the integration across task forces

<Susie> Alan: Discussion about ontologies and vocabularies is important, especially in neuroscience

<Susie> Alan: Won't be at the F2F

<Susie> Alan; Will be able to dial in for the F2F

<Susie> Tim: Should be content or outline for stimulus for discussion

<Susie> Tim: Would anyone be interested in working with me?

<Susie> Susie: me!

<Susie> AnnaMaria: Would be interested in presenting ideas

<Susie> Susie: We could twist Kei's arm

<Susie> Susie: Could discuss during the task lead call on Monday at 9am ET

<Susie> Tim: Would be great, and will write short discussion guide in advance

<Susie> Tim: Where would Paolo's presentation best fit?

<Susie> http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLSIG/Meetings/2009-04-30_F2F -> F2F Agenda

<Susie> Susie: Paolo's talk would fit well in the terminology discussion on Friday afternoon

<Susie> AnnaMaria: Interested in presenting on ways to think about discourse

<Susie> Tim: I think it would be interesting

<Susie> Tim: Especially given social interaction on the web

  • Cloud would be very happy to talk to AnnaMaria too at the F2F about her ideas

<Susie> Tim: Lets have an offline discussion

<Susie> Tim: Would it be OK for you to review the strawman document?

<Susie> Tim: We'd very much like input on the experiment side of things

<Susie> TIm: Also hope to get input from Kei and John

<Susie> Tim: The next call will be on April 17