[esip-semantictech] US Semantic Technologies Symposium WAS Re: esip-semanticweb Digest, Vol 108, Issue

Tue Mar 6 02:11:08 EST 2018

I agree with everyone here, and commend Ken on his clear insights. 

The open knowledge network (OKN) that Yolanda discussed at the end, that seems to have been 'under discussion’ (a few meetings) for 2 years in several government agencies, may be a solid direction to encourage uptake and funding, if we can get buy-in. I think that should be presented to the SemTech committee for them/us to be aware of it.

Lewis, I tried to reply to your earlier thread but I’m not sure my reply got sent. I thought your topic was interesting but had thought myself about “going large” with semantic repositories as a critical service infrastructure. I had many conversations at US2TS but without gaining much confidence. Realistically I am doubtful I/we can get there from here on a large scale proposal—too much happening and too little chance of winning. And in any case my idea isn’t in conflict with what you proposed, so I am encouraging your further pursuit of your interest and am interested in supporting it. (But am not sure what you mean by “the ‘overlap’ “?)  

Also time is off the essence, we need to be having phone calls with the NSF directorates we expect to be interested in the proposal.

John

---------------------------------------
John Graybeal
jbgraybeal at mindspring.com
650-450-1853
skype: graybealski
linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/johngraybeal/

> On Mar 5, 2018, at 14:54, Ruth Duerr via esip-semanticweb <esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org> wrote:
> 
> Sorry Ken,
> 
> I can not allay those concerns.  Instead I am afraid that I echo them.  I especially took the call for “knowledge engineering” to heart since I agree that neither the science community nor the development community is really ready to play or even interested in the details of semantics beyond the simple things like schema.org <http://schema.org/> tags on webpages.  And your comments about tools are right on the money.
> 
> Ruth
> 
>> On Mar 5, 2018, at 3:26 PM, Mcgibbney, Lewis J (398M) via esip-semanticweb <esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org <mailto:esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Ken,
>> This context is excellent. It not only provides expectations for what to possibly discover as US2TS next time around, but maybe more importantly, raises some fundamental questions about what the ESIP SemTech Roadmap should be. This, as you may know, has been a sticking point for us for some time. 
>> In our last committee meeting, we did discuss having the Roadmap item formalized by the time the AAG 2018 Meeting takes place on April 10-14th. 
>> In terms of the NSF CSSI proposal, I truly feel that explicitly engaging the 'overlap' is where a competitive proposal needs to be. I am going to start another thread specifically on this topic with the aim of getting something off the ground.
>> I would really also look forward to hearing Ruth/John's impressions of US2TS as well.
>> Lewis
>> 
>> On 3/5/18, 10:01 AM, "esip-semanticweb on behalf of esip-semanticweb-request at lists.esipfed.org <mailto:esip-semanticweb-request at lists.esipfed.org>" <esip-semanticweb-bounces at lists.esipfed.org <mailto:esip-semanticweb-bounces at lists.esipfed.org> on behalf of esip-semanticweb-request at lists.esipfed.org <mailto:esip-semanticweb-request at lists.esipfed.org>> wrote:
>>    Message: 1
>>    Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 11:00:14 -0700
>>    From: "Bagstad, Kenneth" <kjbagstad at usgs.gov <mailto:kjbagstad at usgs.gov>>
>>    To: <esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org <mailto:esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org>>
>>    Subject: Re: [esip-semantictech] esip-semanticweb Digest, Vol 108,
>>    	Issue 1
>>    Message-ID:
>>    	<CABRisSAXhbYkV1nU6zpyVqEAmbHjCVN8iLBV1JxkzzL4_8_+2A at mail.gmail.com <mailto:CABRisSAXhbYkV1nU6zpyVqEAmbHjCVN8iLBV1JxkzzL4_8_+2A at mail.gmail.com>>
>>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>> 
>>    Hi folks -
>> 
>>    Wanted to offer some brief thoughts after the US Semantic Technologies
>>    Symposium held in Dayton last week that Ruth, John, and I attended (
>>    http://us2ts.org/ <http://us2ts.org/>). I found it to be thought provoking and with some great
>>    ideas, but with a much bigger emphasis on ontology construction than
>>    application, and relatively minimal geosemantics discussion included in the
>>    plenary track. There was an almost constant call for "more tools" but
>>    notably absent was an inventory of what tools are already available, their
>>    strengths/weaknesses, and how they might be built upon rather than
>>    restarting at square one. Some of that may stem from being a dispersed
>>    field where technology is constantly advancing and tools that don't gain a
>>    foothold within the 2-5 year development window of their grant funding
>>    disappear into the ether. Still, a lack of vision of where we want to go
>>    combined with ignorance of the "tools landscape"  seems like an environment
>>    ripe for wheel reinvention.
>> 
>>    I mention this given the NSF call that Lewis had circulated. Are we clear
>>    on our big-picture goals (beyond those in the ESIP bylaws), the tools that
>>    we already have and bring to the table (thinking beyond SWEET and COR to
>>    John's work on BioPortal and CEDAR, to our work on k.LAB/Integrated
>>    Modelling, which sounds like it has some overlap with what Lewis is
>>    proposing, and others), and how we might most clearly reach those goals?
>> 
>>    Ruth and John, would be interested in your perspectives as well - my
>>    perspective is as a cross-domain specialist still relatively new to ESIP
>>    who collaborates on semantic web applications, but not as a computer
>>    scientist, so those with a longer history in the semantic web field might
>>    be able to allay some of those concerns.
>> 
>>    Cheers,
>>    Ken
>> 
>> 
>>    ===============
>>    Ken Bagstad, PhD
>>    Research Economist
>>    Geosciences & Environmental Change Science Center
>>    U.S. Geological Survey
>>    P.O. Box 25046, DFC, MS 980
>>    Denver, CO 80225
>>    (303) 236-1330
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> esip-semanticweb mailing list
>> esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org <mailto:esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org>
>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/esip-semanticweb
> 
> _______________________________________________
> esip-semanticweb mailing list
> esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/esip-semanticweb

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.deltaforce.net/pipermail/esip-semanticweb/attachments/20180305/3666ba16/attachment-0001.html>