Actions

Ontolog Forum

Revision as of 07:43, 9 January 2016 by imported>KennethBaclawski (Fix PurpleMediaWiki references)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Ideas and Developing Plans for the "OOR-Team presentation" for the summit workshop (2008.04.29 pm)

Pertinent Inputs and Resources

Notes from the 2008.04.19 10:30am EDT conference call

Conference call details:

Proceedings

1. Outline of presentation

  • Leo: summarizing - (i) Overview, rationale and motivations, (ii) existing efforts, and how they satisfy the rationale, (iii) what people need, and how they satisfy the rationale, (iv) summarizing that into requirements, and how they satisfy the rationale, & (v) the roadmap to developing/delivering that in an OOR implementation effort, and how they satisfy the rationale <--adopted   
    • Michelle: maybe we can call item (i) "Value proposition" (which is business speak)   
      • re: labeling (i), we could do both -- to satisfy the geeks as well as the business folks
  • Mike:
    • we should look to the past as well as to the future
    • the communique will be covering a lot of this too, right?
    • we might tweak this based on input of the day-and-a-half before the presentation
  • Peter: differentiating our presentation vs. the summit presentations
    • discussion group vs. implementation group
    • pragmatics
    • sustainability
    • the OOR-Team - identifying members, implementers and observers

2. Splitting up the work

  • Leo: (i) & (ii);
  • Peter - (iii) & (iv);
  • Mike - (v)
  • Leo: make sure we include ALL the 2-slide summaries (verbatim) that the OOR-Panelists turned in. That's the "contract" when we solicited those two slides from them.

3. next call to review merged draft

4. candidate presentation format / presenters:

  • (i) Opening - Leo - 10 min.
  • (ii) thru (iv) - 10 minutes each
    • (ii) existing efforts
    • (iii) user needs
    • (iv) implementer requirements
  • (v) roadmap - 20 min
  • open discussion (with Leo, Mike, Peter and panel)
  • candidates (presenters/panel) - Leo, Mike, Peter, Ravi, Ken, Bruce, Todd, Frank, Fabian, Barry, Mike G, ...

5. milestones

  • plan and split work - Sat 2008.04.19 (now) -
  • slide segments exchanged for co-authors review and merge - by the time of the next co-authors call (below)
  • next co-authors sync-up call - Mon 2008.04.21 6:00pm EDT / 3:00pm PDT
  • merged draft review and released (via [oor-forum]) for team review - by end-of-day Mon 2008.04.21
  • team discussion - 2008.04.24 10:30am meeting - ConferenceCall_2008_04_24
  • slide deck finalized for submission -

6. Mike's input - discussion with Peter

  • platform, model, federation, connecting other repositories & loose ontologies, support, ... phasing, funding, 'open' advocacy
  • aligning with institutions (like Apache Foundation)
  • community linked by shared best practice ... and a cool logo
    • use something like the W3C Linking Open Data initiative model as a stepping stone to get the OOR initiative off the ground

Notes from the 2008.04.21 6:00 pm EDT conference call

Conference call details:

Proceedings

  • review of work-in-progress
  • Mike's draft sldies (v2 - 9 slides) received
  • Discussion:
    • what "ontology" is in scope
      • represented in "formal" language - do we insist on "formal"
    • the taxonomy of "openness" and what is our shared vision, as we will lay out on the roadmap?
      • Leo will allude to it in the opening, and Mike will pick up and develop this point
  • Peter: looking to contribute infrastructure support to the OOR effort
  • new deadline for 3-way exchange of first draft slides - end-of-day today
  • next call: 5pm EDT tomorrow (Tue 2008.04.22)
  • will now aim at releasing the first draft deck to OOR-team review tomorrow

Notes from the 2008.04.22 5:00 pm EDT conference call

Conference call details:

Proceedings

  • presenters confirmed
  • Updated the Presentation Outline to:
    • 1. What is the OOR? Overview, rationale and motivations - Leo Obrst
    • 2. What are some existing efforts? How do these address or satisfy the rationale? - Bruce Bargmeyer
    • 3. What do users expect? How do these needs align with the rationale? - Ken Baclawski
    • 4. How do these needs translate into OOR system requirements? How do these satisfy the rationale? - Evan Wallace
    • 5. What is the roadmap to developing/delivering these requirements in an OOR implementation effort? How does the roadmap satisfy the rationale? - Mike Dean

Notes from the 2008.04.25 12:00 pm EDT conference call

Conference call details:

Proceedings

  • Reviewing feedback and suggested changes
    • Fabian - suggesting less verbose pages - split to more pages
    • John Graybeal - suggesting we change the (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) order to (i) (iii)

(iv) (ii) (v)

      • Mike, Peter, Leo liked it - we'll change accordingly
    • Evan - changes to slide#6; also bigger fonts & split pages
    • Peter - suggest highlighting the different roles in OOR Users: the "big guys" vs. the "small guys"



Retrieved from "https://ontologforum.com/index.php?title=OOR/OOR_Team_20080429_Presentation_Strawman&oldid=2151"