Devices Ontology WG Mtg 2009.07.21

Agenda/minutes for Device Ontology Working Group meeting 2009.07.21

Agenda

  1. Logistics: Welcome, Minutes Review, Agenda Review, Chat Room
  2. Status of action items
  3. How to incorporate W3C work into MMI Device Ontology
  4. Review ontology and recent updates
  5. End Logistics: Next meeting, Action items, Attendees

Minutes

Logistics: Welcome, Minutes Review, Agenda Review, Chat Room

Minutes review.

Agenda approval.

Status of Action Items

  • [all] Submit your additions to the ontology to Carlos --> Have not recently received any new change suggestions.
  • [Carlos] Update list of possible ontology changes, in time for the meeting -> Done, see pending mods to ontology.
  • [Roy] Follow up on current definitions questions/discussions with Nan.
  • [Luis] Update observation ontology -> no updates.
  • [Nan] See what additional properties to associate to Deployment -> see today's discussion below.
  • [all] Review instructions and facets outline and pick pending items (and/or suggest new ones) for inclusion in ontology. Send questions/suggestions to the mailing list.

How to incorporate W3C SSN work into MMI Device Ontology

Not discussed.

Ontology Updates

Note: Added an "rdfs:label" column in the table for reviewing properties. The overall intend is to better qualify the URIs (more specifically, the local names) where appropriate while being able to take advantage of the (simpler) labels for display purposes.

* Renamed data properties startDate and endDate (with domain Deployment) with startDeploymentDate and endDeploymentDate, and associated startDate and endDate as the labels, respectively.

* Renamed data property hasDimension (with domain System) with hasSystemDimension and associated hasDimension as the label.

* Renamed data property isConsumable (with domain System) with isConsumableSystem and associated isConsumable as the label.

* Renamed basePlatform (with domain Deployment) with hasBasePlatform.

Proposed by JG:
+ Created datatype property: CalibrationSchedule calibrationScheduleHasOmissionConsequences (0..1) string
   label: hasOmissionConsequences
   {where the string is free text description of the effect of not following the Calibration Schedule}

Updated version: http://mmisw.org/ont/mmi/20090721T144744/device
NOTE: where available, the diagram shows the rdfs:labels associated to the entities; otherwise the corresponding local names.

Discussion

  • (Note: the above changes were not explicitly discussed today.)
  • How do we deal with concepts from other ontologies - import what is needed.
  • Requirement to have other representations than RDF? like XML Schemas? Should we address the issue of having different models in different that RDF ?.
  • A lot of discussion about deployments and how to track them. Note that the CESN ontology includes a Deployment class.  Bob Morris provides a link to "Machine reasoning about anomalous sensor data" by Matt Calder, Robert A. Morris, Francesco Peri. Submitted for publication.  http://efg.cs.umb.edu/pubs/SensorDataReasoning.pdf
  • Want to capture user and data management applications. For example, how to capture the history of my devices? One possible way: keep snapshots of ontology instantiations.
  • However, do we really want our ontology to provide support for management applications? If so, we should probably call it something like "Device Management Ontology."
  • Continuing with this "Intrinsic vs. management properties" issue, we should consider the following 3 options:
    1. capture only information about families of devices and its intrinsic properties (note that most –if not all– entries in the current list of use cases only require this kind of info);
    2. capture properties to track events associated with particular devices;
    3. capture both kinds of information.
  • In any case, Carlos suggests to keep a clear distinction of these concerns. I we want both, even consider separating them into different ontologies (with the data management one importing/referencing the other).
  • Note that most elements in the current ontology are for case 1, while others (actually very few), like the hasFunctionalityStatus and hasDeployedMedium properties for systems, and the Deployment class (in particular because of its startDeploymentDate and endDeploymentDate properties), are for data management purposes, case 2.
  • Next meeting continue working on use cases and an abstract to AGU.
  • John will discuss the W3C activities at the next meeting.

 

End Logistics: Action items, Attendees, Next meeting

New action Items

Attendees:

  • Bruce Andrews
  • Bob Arko
  • Luis Bermudez
  • Nan Galbraith
  • John Graybeal
  • Bob Morris
  • Carlos Rueda

Regrets: Roy Lowry

Chat room messages:

[7:49] anonymous morphed into Bob Morris
[8:11] Carlos Rueda: http://marinemetadata.org/community/teams/ontdevices/ontdevrel
[8:11] anonymous morphed into Bob Arko
[8:12] Bob Arko morphed into Bob Arko (LDEO)
[8:15] Luis Bermudez (SURA): http://marinemetadata.org/community/teams/ontdevices/
[8:28] Bob Morris: could someone please put the usecase page URL here
[8:43] Carlos Rueda: use cases: http://marinemetadata.org/community/teams/ontdevices/usecases
[9:14] Bob Morris: Machine reasoning about anomalous sensor data Matt Calder, Robert A.
Morris, Francesco Peri. Submitted for publication.
PDF at http://efg.cs.umb.edu/pubs/SensorDataReasoning.pdf

Next Telecon Time

Next telecon is Tuesday 2009-08-04 at 1500 UTC.  (1600 UTC in winter)

AttachmentSize
device.png222.61 KB