Agenda

• Logistics: Welcome, Minutes Review, Agenda Review
• Status of last action items
• Review of use cases
• Use cases: voting on priorities
• Versioning: strategy to start using MMI Registry and Repository
  
• End Logistics: Next meeting, Action items, Attendees.

---

Minutes

Logistics: Welcome, Minutes Review, Agenda Review

Comments on Last Minutes/Last Meeting

.

Status of last action items

• Carlos added Use Case 13 to the repository. He is also reviewing and updating some the current use cases for discussion (see below).
  

Review use cases

Use Case 1:

• Previous version: Discover and plot data from common sensor types automatically -> e.g., via SOS Services
• New version: Get data for common sensor types automatically via a standard Web service
• Comments: The new version: (a) addresses comments during the 2008.10.14 telecon; (b) improves the wording a bit; (c) removes the data plotting/visualization aspect (not central to the use case).
  
• Further comment: The steps may perhaps be better described from the user point of view (the registry behind the scenes could be omitted, for example).

Discussion:

• This use case involves several actors that, although useful to give context, are not central (eg., Registry, SOS).
• What we mean by "sensor type"? platform, model?
• Perhaps "Data collection method" would be a better category.
  

Use Case 2:

• Previous version: Classify devices according to functionality
• New version.
  
• Comments: Context has been added but the sequence of steps has not changed (see 2008.10.14 telecon).

Discussion:

• Is this use case related with instances or classes? ... It is related with classes.
• Would this use case require the underlying device ontology to be extended? Yes, probably. This discussion led to the following point.
  
• A new use case was extracted from this one: "Characterize a new device model from a manufacturer." This case may eventually require updates to the ontology.
  
• Need to complete the sequence of steps. This step was added:  4.  Catalog (or database) is updated with the given functionality based classification.

Use Case 3:

• Previous version: Find devices that can be deployed from a given platform.
• New version.
  
• Comments: (see 2008.10.14 telecon). Sequence of steps and link to Platforms Ontology work have been added.
  

Discussion:

• Not discussed.
  

Discussion about search:

• Criteria for searching is in general multi-faceted (eg, search for types of measurements, search for data, search for instruments, etc.), with several facets often inter-playing during a search session. Carlos refers to Peter Fox's presentation during the MMI OOS Interoperability Wokshop in Boulder, CO, last week: Ontologies and Semantic Applications in Earth Sciences, in particular to the slide containing a screenshot of the Advanced Search page of the Earth System Grid. (Unfortunately, that link is reporting an internal server error message at time of writing.)
  
• Facets should be orthogonal, but there may be cases where the distinction may not be as clear.
• A search query: Give me CTD instruments suitable for coastal waters with values in this particular range.
  
• It is proposed to examine the existing use cases with the goal of extracting search facets.
• John suggested in the telecon that most of the use cases that he wrote terribly confuse unrelated activities with the actual terms of ontological interest.
• Our hypothesis is that all the use cases are in fact derived from a single generic use case: "Find a device that meets the search criteria."
• Determine if there are any elements in the use cases that 

     A) Are *not* captured in our search facet list, and yet

  B) *Are* critical to the ontology

  If we do not find any elements that meet both tests A and B, then the search criteria are essentially the things that need to be properties in the ontology, and we can vote on the importance of those criteria/properties directly, instead of voting on use cases.
  

Use cases: voting on priorities

From the email:

Also, assuming the combined use case survives, we essentially have all the material we need to conduct the following poll:

You are given 3 votes, to be allocated any way you want. Of the remaining use cases -- 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 -- how do you allocate your 3 votes for the most important use cases? Please think about that before the meeting, if you can.

The current votes are as follows (click the link in the header to open the use case text in a new browser window):

	1	2	3	6	7	9	10	11	12	13
Nan								3
Carlos								1		2
Total								4		2

Discussion

• Voting is postponed until the list of use cases as well as the search facets are reviewed.
  

Versioning: strategy to start using MMI Registry and Repository

Current Device Ontology entry in the MMI Registry and Repository is here: http://mmisw.org/or/ontologies/1206. The question in this topic is: What strategy should we adopt to handle the existing and new versions of the Device Ontology from the SourceForge repository to the MMI Registry?

Discussion:

• MMI Registry and Repository to be used as primary system to keep the versions of the ontology.
  

End Logistics: Next Meeting, Action Items, Attendees

Next Telecon Time

Action Items

Attendees

• Bruce Andrews
• John Graybeal
• Carlos Rueda

Attachment	Size
esg-faceted-search.png	429.89 KB