[esip-semantictech] [PROPOSAL] Create a Linked Data-as-a-Service (LDaaS) Service for COR

[Mcgibbney, Lewis J (398M)]

Hi John,
Thanks for the response, replies inline

From: John Graybeal <jbgraybeal at mindspring.com>
Date: Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 8:38 AM
To: "Mcgibbney, Lewis J (398M)" <Lewis.J.McGibbney at jpl.nasa.gov>
Cc: "esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org" <esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org>
Subject: Re: [esip-semantictech] [PROPOSAL] Create a Linked Data-as-a-Service (LDaaS) Service for COR

Couple of thoughts here Lewis.  I love the enthusiasm and direction of the work and proposals, very gratifying and appropriate.

Thank you.

I think people will get a little confused about how LDaaS is different than a COR API (which exists).

Understood. Thank you for this feedback. I didn’t see it that way as I wrote it, but I can now understand how it could be interpreted that way.

I can see the answer in broad terms but my brain needs a sharper hook to hang onto.  Also, be aware there is an initiative in Europe to provide a common API service across multiple repositories. I don’t think either of these points should discourage your vision, just inform it slightly.

Agreed. Please point us to the European effort(s) so we are on the same page. Thanks

I think it would be great if you could be at US2TS this year to talk about these products and your vision for LDaaS. It’s a big opportunity for connections and for learning state of the US scene, and how COR might fit. (I’m not yet sure I can make it, quite likely I can not, unfortunately.)

I just received information that my application for travel assistance has been approved. This means I would be representing PO.DAAC Data Engineering and of course ESIP SemTech to the best of my ability. I need to wait for JPL forecasting to approve my travel then I can go ahead with booking. In short, I am optimistic I can attend.

also for advancing the auto-notification processing in COR, thanks to you and Carlos both.

Kudos Carlos!

Regarding "I feel that there is much more we could be doing with COR to enable more widespread use of vocabularies and ontologies in knowledge-based systems.”: Yes, I live life with that feeling. :-)
- The piece I think is most needed are tools that make it simple to do high value things: converting vocabularies to ontologies (COR has most of that, its SKOS format could be updated for current best practices though)

Can you expand here? I am very interested to hear what you think it lacking. Or is that what you describe below?

; use a vocabulary or a branch of one in a web form or data system form; evaluate the completeness and quality of the vocabulary and its descriptive metadata; convert a resource to an Excel spreadsheet or graphical view for people who value that.

All nice features yes.

- The other (!) most-needed piece is getting a lot of vocabularies into COR, so that it is a go-to resource. (Sooner or later an organization will propose and establish a major repository of earth science vocabularies, and if COR has the lead in that it may be adopted for that project.)

This is exactly where the LDaaS effort is targeted.

- Oh, and a key COR  development effort is to make the important resources stand out, so the testing and in-progress resources are no longer swamping the list. (See “evaluate completeness and quality” item.)

How do you suggest this is evaluated? I would suggest creation of a Github ticket.

And finally, re Mark’s comment to coordinate with NERC: Yes, absolutely. I’ve coordinated with them on many occasions, and at least once gotten permission to ‘republish’ their resources, *as soon as we have the ability to update our resources automatically*.  We’ll need to renew that conversation before trying to do it—I know Roy is emeritus but I don’t think he’s still king ;-) —but perhaps we are getting close.  (I would have wished for the resource to go into MMI ORR, but now, not so sure. Maybe the COR committee can discuss options for MMI ORR vis-a-vis COR in this year 2019.)

OK well it sounds like we are moving towards a convergence of smaller pieces of the puzzle. I would really like to either a) confirm if the following functionality exists, or b) build it if it does not … be able to query across COR instances e.g. MMI and COR. This will be hugely useful when we start hosting data over and above vocabulary and ontologies. Think sensor data manifested as RDF. It would be nice to use the COR SPARQL API which would provide transparent access to *any other* COR instance… this would of course be off by default and would be switched on depending on what the client requested.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-semanticweb/attachments/20190110/67999dce/attachment.html>