Notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ejto_EpoOX0yBcz8RdgQZgk3Cb8oB11Z56LVRnj-bH8/

Overview of IFest 2014 (Damaris)

  • March 18-21 at Duke http://www.vivoweb.org/blog/2014/02/2014-vivo-implementation-fest to register and for logistics information

  • the actual I-Fest will be Wednesday and Thursday, but a Hackathon will be starting on Tuesday the 18th, organized by Chris Barnes

  • there will be an additional ontology working session on Friday morning, the 20th

  • a preliminary schedule is online -- please sent

 

Ontology priorities for IFest

  • Humanities. Duke would like to show what they’ve done with their Arts college and would like to discuss representing humanities work in general

    • what is different about the humanities and how to represent it in the ISF?

      • derivative works and temporally-distinct performances

    • Duke uses Elements for data collection, and humanities faculty initially found it difficult to enter their publications

    • Most of the changes Duke has introduced have been new types of publications and artistic works

      • and they have introduced relationships that encompass related works and derivative events, such  as performances

      • these represent an outcome of the work

    • Dagobert -- the Information Artifact Ontology work at Buffalo would benefit from learning about this effort -- could you send the information to Barry Smith at Buffalo?

    • Steve -- the specializationOf relationship in PROV-O (provenance) ontology looks promising

    • Brian -- we have a new project with Stanford and Harvard that is trying to bring together traditional bibliographic information with additional information on authors, on the usage of the resource -- and PROV-O looks applicable there, as well

  • Stable VIVO URIs as a contributor to authority records. Violeta -- will the work being done with bibliographic information address the issue raised back into September of submitting VIVO URIs to authority services -- VIAF is now accepting more than just national library identifiers for people, including ISNI identifiers -- we should engage or the opportunity will slip away

    • it would be excellent to have a VIVO URI associated with bibliographic data, since MARC data will not be here for a long time

    • this working group should help get the ball rolling and coordinate a single place for VIVO URIs where they can be found for use in authority records

  • Brian -- do you think VIVO URIs will be considered in the same realm of stability as other identifiers? Legacy catalog systems don’t deal well with identifiers that have to change, and it’s even hard to add a death date to a record

      • Violeta -- I’m thinking ahead to the next generation catalog, which will require a URI for an authority record (person, place, organization)

  • Dagobert -- this is where ORCID should come in -- as the one identifier to unify all the version of the name

    • Violeta -- LOC authority files are not complete -- lacking journal article authors that have not published books, whereas the VIVO URI should be more universally available (or a URI from any other institutional research networking system)

    • Dagobert -- we should not be advocating for yet another repository of identifiers, however

  • Brian -- it would be nice if ORCID functions as a cross-reference

    • if you register an ORCID, the VIVO URI should be sent to ORCID

    • then, if the VIVO URI changes, the institution should be able to update the person’s ORCID record, but it may require the researcher to grant permission

  • Adding Schema.org tags to VIVO. Steve -- would like to consider being able to map the VIVO-ISF ontology to schema.org tags for possible inclusion in VIVO display pages

    • Brian -- seems to be picking up momentum -- are people seeing

    • Steve -- the cute little box that Google puts in the upper right hand corner of search results; Facebook is reputedly parsing the data

      • if it is affecting search results as much as Google says it will, this could be a good way to sell faculty members on the value of structured, semantic data

      • we want to be able to argue that VIVO is driving traffic to faculty websites

Working together on the ISF

How are we going to edit the ontology itself as a more collective effort and not just a component of work within development of the code base.

  • What tools should we consider?

    • Melissa had been imagining that we might take the current ISF Subversion repository and move it into Github, where version control is supplemented by a tracker and wiki that can be updated in more automated ways.

    • Protégé is the defacto standard for ontology editing in standalone environments, so Web Protégé is what we’ll be trying out with the Linked Data for Libraries (LD4L) project, but we don’t yet have direct experience with it

      • Melissa’s experience with Web Protégé does not recommend it to her

      • Violeta found Protégé non-intuitive

    • There’s a tool called Top Braid Composer, by Top Quadrant, that is intended to be more intuitive, but that is expensive to use

    • Collibra -- a vocabulary governance platform -- interesting but expensive (~$50K/yr, with a defined number of users)

    • Dagobert -- we can have a facility for commenting that is separate from editing the ontology

    • Lisa Goddard -- StackOverflow (http://stackoverflow.com/) might work well as a discussion board, voting platform, question board, etc. -- even if it doesn’t attempt to edit the ontology

      • and there’s a Semantic StackOverflow (http://answers.semanticweb.com/)

      • would be good to use a platform that doesn’t require having local instances

      • Lisa’s willing to look into it a bit further -- would be helpful locally as well

 

  • Who all wants edit privileges?

    • this would be for adding comments and examples and reviewing changes as well as making modifications/changes to the OWL ontology itself

    • we also need subject matter experts

    • Dagobert -- there needs to be an external representation of the ISF that people who are not comfortable with browsing in Prot´gé

Interest group report (Jing/Damaris)

  • Grants and projects -- see the wiki page for the interest group at https://wiki.duraspace.org/x/M4dTAg 

  • Note that Scripps has already done ontology extension work to represent the hierarchical nature of some NIH grants

  • Next steps -- reviewing the information gathered about CERIF 1.6 and CASRAI to get a sense of what data elements will be most important for discovery, leaving for later how to represent all the nuances of information for research administrators (some of which run into issues with privacy)

 

============

Agenda for 2014-02-05 VIVO-ISF Ontology Call

WebEx Call-in Information

Topic: VIVO-ISF Ontology Call

  • Date: Every other week on Wednesday with no end date
  • Time: 2:00 pm, Eastern Standard Time (New York, GMT-05:00)
  • Meeting Number: 648 855 983
  • Meeting Password: (This meeting does not require a password.)

To join the online meeting, go to https://cornell.webex.com/cornell/j.php?ED=169403917&UID=492782112&RT=MiMxMQ%3D%3D

Call-in Information




  • No labels

All content on the LYRASIS Wiki is licensed under the CC BY (Attribution) license, unless otherwise noted.