[Esip-semanticharmonization] [EXTERNAL] recording link from (10/21/20) ESIP Semantic Harmonization 1 hour group meeting

[Brandon Whitehead]

It seems to be the place where those issues end up.

Is there a need for a SWEET cluster?  The Semantic Technologies
Committee seems to be the place for coordination, COR is more about the
technical stack and services, and Semantic Harmonization to date has
been focusing on adding Cryo terms to ENVO.

A one or two hour session a month where some number of people trudge
through SWEET issues, and resolve/merge them(!), isn't the worst idea.
Of course the follow up question, do people have bandwidth for a
cluster of this nature?

/Brandon


On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 22:32 +0000, Mcgibbney, Lewis J (172B) via Esip-
semanticharmonization wrote:
> Very useful Gary thank you.
>
> Quick question for everyone. It looks like SemHarm telecon’s are the
> best place to bring SWEET topics for community discussion. If this is
> the case then I’m going to need to rejuggle my calendar.
>
>
> Dr. Lewis John McGibbney Ph.D., B.Sc. (Hons)
> Enterprise Search Technologist, Web and Mobile Application
> Development Group (172B)
> Application, Consulting, Development and Engineering Section (1722)
> Information and Technology Solutions Directorate
> O (818) 393-7402  |  M (626) 487-3476
> https://jpl.webex.com/meet/lmcgibbn
>
> JPL  |  jpl.nasa.gov
>
>  ITSD Future focused. Mission driven.
>
>
>
> From: Gary Berg-Cross <gbergcross at gmail.com>
> Date: Wednesday, October 21, 2020 at 1:17 PM
> To: Ruth Duerr <ruth.duerr3 at gmail.com>, Pier Buttigieg <
> pbuttigi at mpi-bremen.de>, Mark Schildhauer <schild at nceas.ucsb.edu>
> Cc: "Mcgibbney, Lewis J (172B)" <lewis.j.mcgibbney at jpl.nasa.gov>,
> "Charlesl.lm8ms F. Vardeman II" <charles.vardeman at gmail.com>, Robert
> rovetto <ontologos at yahoo.com>, Kai Blumberg <
> kblumberg at email.arizona.edu>, "annethessen at gmail.com" <
> annethessen at gmail.com>, Megan Carter <megancarter at esipfed.org>, "
> esip-semanticharmonization at lists.esipfed.org" <
> esip-semanticharmonization at lists.esipfed.org>, Bill Duncan <
> wdduncan at lbl.gov>, Nancy Wiegand <wiegand at cs.wisc.edu>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] recording link from (10/21/20) ESIP Semantic
> Harmonization 1 hour group meeting
>
> Here is the link to the recording of today's  1 hour Semantic
> Harmonization session.
>
https://transcripts.gotomeeting.com/#/s/08e489c424ef96daaf5da0ad21ab73d26c9a57dce9e3e9eede39d9c27b825d07
>
> We spent most of the time planning for the Winter ESIP submission,
> which we dragooned Ksi into drafting and what to follow up with.
> Here are the notes we took as a group for the session:
>
> ·
> ·         ESIP Winter Meeting sessions
> ·          (prop DUE NOV 5)  -what Semantic Harmonization means, what
> we have done and how to do it with a range of semantic resources -
> ·
> ·
> o
> o    includes inviting others
> o     to our session to try to get a common conversation and this
> type of effort started up in their cluster and/or as a next round of
> our work.
> o
> o
> o    Form describing how to propose
> o     a ESIP session:
> o
> o
> §
> §
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TXVHqig7AgfGSblTR-6Qxprc-6ctbAUU4VvYpoJVszM/edit
> §
> §
> §  Kai to take lead, Mark (others?)
> §   assist
> §
> o
> o
> o    Propose TUTORIAL?  (next-step
> o     activity a month afterwards?-- agreement)
> o
> ·
> ·
> ·         How/whether to achieve outreach/connection
> ·          with other ESIP thematic-data clusters: Biology, Ag &
> Climate, Marine, Soil (approved but pending-- few weeks to resolve);
> also the Discovery cluster (KG, profiles)
> ·
> ·
> o
> o    Recording of the talk Ag
> o     & Climate hosted yesterday: https://youtu.be/IaF9E5bWB9o
> o
> o
> o    Soil ontology WG
> o    https://ufl.zoom.us/j/94053340231?pwd=RHg3ajZwSE1
> o
> o
> o    Or perhaps focus on CF per
> o     Brandon’s suggestion.
> o
> ·
> ·
> ·         Ruth moving to data harmonization
> ·          task at NASA until early next year, working with Peter Fox
> and Mark Parsons-- will involve semantics
> ·
> ·
> ·         Papers need to move forward
> ·
> ·
> ·         Ongoing efforts:
> ·
> ·
> o
> o    SWEET as “junction for terms”
> o
> o
> o    Cryosphere terms in EnvO
> o
> o
> o    SWEET/Envo Harmonization
> o
> ·
> ·
> ·         How bridge CF, GCMD, DarwinCore
> ·          etc (i.e. well-established “metadata-ish” vocabs) to be
> more interoperable and semantic
> ·
> ·
> o
> o    Possibly Peckham’s SVO as
> o     CF surrogate(?)--http://www.geoscienceontology.org/index.html
> o
> o
> o    TDWG/DwC: Ramona Walls had
> o     started work, but needs greater focus; also Anne Thessen as
> contact (Stan Blum has started attending some of our meetings)
> o
> ·
> Need “guidelines” for creating a good vocabulary (ontology)--
> somewhat like attached paper but more specifically about creating
> OWL/RDF and what annotation properties, axioms, etc. to use   (EnvO
> as exemplar) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4750991/
>
> Gary Berg-Cross Ph.D.
> Independent Consultant
> Potomac, MD
> 240-426-0770
> > "The Narrow Corridor to Liberty
> > Our argument in this book is that for liberty to emerge and
> > flourish, both state and society must be strong. A strong state is
> > needed to control violence, enforce laws, and provide public
> > services that are critical for a life in which people are empowered
> > to make and pursue their choices. A strong, mobilized society is
> > needed to control and shackle the strong state. Doppelgänger
> > solutions and checks and balances don’t solve the Gilgamesh problem
> > because, without society’s vigilance, constitutions and guarantees
> > are not worth much more than the parchment they are written on.
> > Squeezed between the fear and repression wrought by despotic states
> > and the violence and lawlessness that emerge in their absence is a
> > narrow corridor to liberty. It is in this corridor that the state
> > and society balance each other out. This balance is not about a
> > revolutionary moment. It’s a constant, day‑in, day- out struggle
> > between the two. This struggle brings benefits. In the corridor the
> > state and society do not just compete, they also cooperate. This
> > cooperation engenders greater capacity for the state to deliver the
> > things that society wants and foments greater societal mobilization
> > to monitor this capacity.
> > What makes this a corridor, not a door, is that achieving liberty
> > is a process; you have to travel a long way in the corridor before
> > violence is brought under control, laws are written and enforced,
> > and the state starts providing services to its citizens. It is a
> > process because the state and its elites must learn to live with
> > the shackles society puts on them and different segments of society
> > have to learn to work together despite their differences.
> > From -THE NARROW CORRIDOR by Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson

________________________________

Please consider the environment before printing this email
Warning: This electronic message together with any attachments is confidential. If you receive it in error: (i) you must not read, use, disclose, copy or retain it; (ii) please contact the sender immediately by reply email and then delete the emails.
The views expressed in this email may not be those of Landcare Research New Zealand Limited. http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz