[Esip-semanticharmonization] Saved text from Wednesday's (11/8/23) ESIP Semantic Harmonization Cluster 2 hour group meeting

[Gary Berg-Cross]

The audio file is in our shared drive at:
https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1zd8juwEhgcvh6ZK2jALdFI7ugLZx_XcN

Here is the saved text explain how we came up with proposals for 3 sessions:

14:09:11 I think it will enhance everything without needing to cut anything
out and also make it more manageable. So I'm Very excited about.
14:09:27 I think one comment on your review. Of the 3 sessions is I think
we should have everybody that's involved.
14:09:36 From ESIP in the ocean decade. Give a small talk at the beginning.
Yeah, so that one gets a bigger picture.
14:09:47 Of all the elements that are being pursued within ESIP and then
some of that would then follow on with the workshop.
14:09:55 One question in my mind is did you discuss? The feasibility and
what would be optimum for quote unquote workshops.
14:10:03 Or more breakouts into Working sessions on a topic. I mean, we
could potentially have 6 or 7, even 8.
14:10:10 Little snippets in the first session. We have maybe 2 panels. The
question is how many workshops might we target?
14:10:20 Yeah, no, we, we did not. Flesh it out. Other than to say that I
know like We wanna at least have some sort of like Otis centered.
14:10:33 Part of it. Like get have a have a real world example of that and
then And then also what Karen mentioned about the decoder implementation.
14:10:44 So, no, I don't think we know yet. I think it's still open.
14:10:49 Sounds like a minimum of 2. I can imagine 3. It would
14:10:51 Yeah. Yeah. And then the CMECS maybe would, you know.
14:10:57 And before, yeah, I didn't hear from Rose. I don't know if you've
talked to Rose at all.
14:11:04 No, not since the last meeting, but.
14:11:11 I meant to reach out on Slack and I did not.
14:11:13 Yes, I'm gonna look at email to see if anybody. Quickly said
they'll be later.
14:11:18 Yeah.
14:11:19 I don't think I have anything. Yeah. And we do need, we should
have more people, although John is here.
14:11:27 So it says that's good.
14:11:33 I know, I know it does feel wrong to just say like, you know, kind
of, okay, all in favor.
14:11:43 Okay.
14:11:40 Kate says she's going to be late. I just saw an email in the
middle of some training that's running over time.
14:11:49 So. Alright, so at least we'll have that. I don't see anything
else.
14:11:59 Yeah, for the workshop we
14:12:05 That probably will need like that will definitely need the most. I
don't know, thought and structure in order to make sure that it's.
14:12:15 Beneficial, you know, cause when people are doing stuff, it can
get really out in the weeds.
14:12:22 But
14:12:25 I think it also has the potential to be the most like impactful.
But that's my home bias.
14:12:33 Yes.
14:12:33 Caroline, can we stop for 1 s? Cause I know we have Nancy and John
here and I wonder is there is there a document to look at or just like a
just a one or 2 sentence like here what we've.
14:12:43 Oh.
14:12:45 We've alluded to like breaking this monster session into 3
digestible chunks.
14:12:52 And just make sure they're up to speed a little bit. So if they
want to engage.
14:12:56 Right. So I dropped the link to the, kind of working session.
Proposal that, that Gary put together, which is really Great.
14:13:11 And, like was a huge lift. And what we're proposing is to split it
up and it's almost it's kind of following the same.
14:13:25 Sequence except for the panel section. Would split into a second
session. And then let me make sure I'm just.
14:13:36 So the. I'm just, I'm glancing through it to make sure that, what
I'm saying through it to make sure that what I'm saying makes sense.
14:13:46 So. The session description would. Kind of run. As written.
14:13:53 And then.
14:13:59 The section that with is panels. Would split off into a second
session. And then there would be a third session.
14:14:09 That's not included yet in the proposal in the, draft proposal,
which would be a work shop style, in the draft proposal, which would be a
workshop style session where people could actually implement some of the
the tools are information that, presented in the first 2.
14:14:26 So the idea was that it would be almost like a like a funnel where
the first session is, it's more high level, broad view, an introduction to
all the broad view, an introduction to all the all the players, broad view,
an introduction to all the all the players why we're here why we're doing
this the motivation and then the second session is a little bit more like
in depth, all the players, why we're here, why we're doing this, the
motivation.
14:14:50 And then the second session is a little bit more like in depth you
know, experts would talk to each other. So it's not like presentations.
14:14:54 It's actually like a dialogue, but that the audience would
participate in that dialogue too. And then the third session would be to
actually like act on the.
14:15:04 You know, new information presented. The benefits there are that
the audience can change throughout the sessions.
14:15:14 So maybe there are people who want to be at that first session and
don't necessarily want to get more in depth and that's okay and then maybe
even vice versa.
14:15:22 It's unknown, but it's it's an easier ask to have really like well
defined sessions that, can be communicated like the benefit to the
participants.
14:15:31 So I think that's what that we were getting at with this. Is that?
Does that make sense?
14:15:40 I think that's helpful. I am to hear certainly I as I'm scrolling
through the document I I don't see the those 3 sessions delineated so maybe
that's what's your sort of proposing to do.
14:15:56 Yeah.
14:15:55 Right. Right, because it was, you know. What's that?
14:15:58 Okay. The way it started is we were going to have, like a very
long session. Broke it into 3 parts.
14:16:09 And it was decided. That it might be better to have smaller.
Sessions on different days so that they would build from something's for
the most general audience know hey this is the ocean decade the sip's
involvement oh here's something that goes into a little bit more of a
people's opinion about particular topics like bringing more data into Otis
or a trustworthy repositories for the ocean decade work.
14:16:36 And then the third, the third session would be some hand now that
now that you've gotten all your fill here a bit you're up to speed If
you're interested in we can we can talk about CMEX and maybe how your
vocabulary and C Mix might come together, something like that as a workshop.
14:16:56 Yeah, that seems, kinda like more bite size chunks. I mean,
there's a risk, of course, that someone will miss some contacts will come
into the second one but having missed the first one and The third one, but
we probably run that risk anyway because you see a 3 h session.
14:17:17 Oh my god, I don't think I can. Do that. I think don't go take a
walk.
14:17:19 Okay.
14:17:19 Okay. Yeah. Right. Exactly.
14:17:23 Yeah, it did seem. Yeah, the longer session it was asking. A lot,
right?
14:17:31 So they might it might help to then in each session You just
remind people some of the context, sort of like, okay, spend a little time
in the second session.
14:17:41 Reviewing what happened in the first session and what might happen
in the third session.
14:17:29 Of yeah, the participants. Yeah, that's a good idea. That's a good.
14:17:50 Consideration. Yeah.
14:17:50 The second part is the panels, then we might have a moderator who
might have 3 or 4 slides.
14:17:59 From the first session and said this particular panel is sort of
going to build on this this and that. And so the moderator might start out
that way and then the panelists would respond and say well I want to go
further into this I think for example that there's an issue here.
14:18:15 And so forth.
14:18:19 That's cool. I like that. Yeah, so that there's a good cohesion.
14:18:25 You know, the sessions are very cohesive and it's definitely like
a part one part 2 part 3.
14:18:31 That's that's good. So we'll have to. Work that into the design.
14:18:37 Which is fine and choose the moderators, I guess. Yeah, once, we
get the lineup.
14:18:45 And have them be responsible.
14:18:56 Yeah, and we can even for the workshop. There can also be an
aspect of letting it, Kind of unfold based on who shows up and what.
14:19:07 The interest is too almost like that I was thinking of the The
unconference that we had like last time where you know people kind of
decide what they want to do.
14:19:18 Just.
14:19:18 Well, I can imagine. Well, I can imagine is some people will
attend the first session. And they'll be interested in Otis.
14:19:26 And they'll come over and talk to Pierre and Adam, whatever, a
variety of people and say, hey, I'm, I'm thinking I'm kind of interested.
14:19:35 What are you going to cover in that session that's on Wednesday.
And they may be able to develop between the first session and the third
session.
14:19:42 Some some real things that are interest other people.
14:19:48 Some of the things what we hear in session one and 2 may help
structure. Optimistically the third session, the workshops.
14:19:59 Okay.
14:19:58 And including the questions and the questions and answers in the
in the panel sessions. May actually do that because we have a very active
and knowledgeable ESIP.
14:20:07 Community that may may say hey you know I'm interested in what she
said and I'm just wondering if you're going to cover any more of that
tomorrow.
14:20:15 So for things like that.
14:20:18 Yeah, in your session proposal, Carolina, like, If there is a
desire to have a break between segments of this kind of for that purpose
that Gary just described.
14:20:33 I think that I, I would need to know that to think about
scheduling. And then one thing I just wanted to remind you, we talked about
it, but I don't see it like explicit.
14:20:47 Thank you.
14:20:42 I see you, Carolina tasked with an overview, but I think it's
really important. For you to be really transparent upfront and tell the
story of how this collaboration came to be like why these 2 groups decided
to work together.
14:20:58 You know why these e-IP clusters exist and why you know you find
it so fascinating to work together and kind of like i think it's nice to be
really authentic like that and help everyone feel like they're up to speed
with, you know, how this all came to be.
14:21:13 I think it's a cool story and I think it sets the stage nicely
before you have, you know, without that, what follows might seem more
disjointed than it, than it truly is.
14:21:24 Hmm.
14:21:24 So I think it's okay, you know, just because we all know this
story doesn't mean really anyone who shows up will.
14:21:33 Okay. I'm.
14:21:41 Okay.
14:21:40 And you know, you can reference your session from last year or
wherever it was. I can't remember now.
14:21:47 Yeah.
14:21:48 And you know. Here's independent interests and the semantics.
Spent a carbonization group in their interest in really consulting with
others and helping more domains you know, get a foothold and like just kind
of Maybe they'll expand on it when they each individually speak, but I
think that's a cool way to set the stage.
14:22:11 And even like talk across.
14:22:10 Okay, cool. I like that. And yeah, I mean, when you're saying it
all, it's been a long, it's been a little journey, right?
14:22:17 Yeah.
14:22:17 Yeah, it has and it's a cool story of like what's possible in
Aesop and I think if you said the expectation right out front that like
We've intentionally broken this up in a discreet way.
14:22:29 Of course, we want you to be here for the whole thing, but we
recognize you know your interest might be peaked more at 1 point than
another.
14:22:38 Yeah.
14:22:36 Here's what you can expect. You know, after you tell that story
and then. Then it will all kind of make a little more sense.
14:22:42 Otherwise, like, I think, you, or, or Pisa participants sometimes
come into these sessions and they feel like outsiders for too long.
14:22:52 When really like there isn't anything they don't know but they
just feel like wait I'm not up to speed.
14:22:59 Yeah, okay.
14:23:05 Yeah, I like that.
14:23:11 And then, yeah, and then that makes sense too if we even. Present
at the at the outset of the first session and then again at the second
session sort of like.
14:23:32 Yeah. That would be really good too, you know, you don't need to
repeat the whole thing, but I think it would be good to.
14:23:39 To orient again.
14:23:25 You know, almost like a map like you are here and this is the
whole, broad 3 session lineup and, this is how it all
14:23:41 One, I wanted to underline is that we proposed as part of the
first session not only the people are that are doing hands on stuff.
14:23:49 For the ocean decade that are part of the But we also had a little
portion. Free portion from clusters, we're going to talk a little bit about
how they view this and how they get involved too.
14:24:02 So it actually was 2 different part. Well, you have Carolina's
introduction. Then we have the people involved in the ocean decade work.
14:24:10 Hmm.
14:24:10 Like Karen Stocks and Pierre. And then we have an opportunity to
have several clusters.
14:24:16 Talk about what they what their involvement is.
14:24:25 Yeah. So how?
14:24:25 Underlined your introduction your introduction you'll say how this
happened and then they'll have an opportunity to say a little bit from the
cluster point of view, their interests.
14:24:38 Okay.
14:24:42 Yeah.
14:24:40 Doesn't change anything you have to say, but it just allows sort
of a reinforcement of it.
14:24:47 Later on. And in that one session.
14:24:49 I'm just, I'm thinking, So it sounds like in the beginning session
there's gonna be sort of like a lightning talk section.
14:25:03 And then How? Did. So then there's 2 parts of that and it's sort
of like, okay, ongoing activities and then the session portion almost
sounds like it's Like, like future looking, right?
14:25:22 Like potential interest and outcomes. Is that is that right or?
14:25:28 Or not necessarily or is it ongoing as well?
14:25:27 It to me. To me, the first part after your introduction, the first
part for the G is project-wide look at things.
14:25:38 People are involved in projects that are involved in the ocean
decade. And then the other part is from within ESIP, these are ESIP
organizations clusters that are sort of working with a topic as part of the
ocean decade or other people like semantic conversation is working with you
and and do it.
14:25:55 Kate as an example.
14:26:00 I'm just, wrapping my brain around how to. Frame that in the flow
of the presentations.
14:26:10 You know what I mean? Or should it just be just that direct? Like,
here's ongoing activities.
14:26:16 Here's the clusters. Like, here's the, of, you know, collaboration
areas.
14:26:21 I'm wondering about the questions that answer. I don't know how
much time you have decided to a lot for session one.
14:26:27 But there it seems like there should be opportunity for some
discussion to a question and answer after after the after the 8 or so
presentations.
14:26:35 We wouldn't want to lose that opportunity to get a You know an
idea about what people are thinking what they're interested in
14:26:41 Yeah, I think maybe what we can do is we can kind of flesh it out
and like, make, that actual list of the activities like, we're gonna try to
Get started on that tomorrow and then.
14:26:55 Compare that, you know, see where the overlap is actually with
like the clusters and Maybe we can actually.
14:27:04 Map that out. I mean, you, it out in the proposal, but Maybe like
get a final list.
14:27:12 I'm just looking at it right now.
14:27:15 Like the clusters and committees because I don't know if that's
14:27:26 If it because like Adam Shepherd. You know, he's gonna present on
science on schema.
14:27:32 Dot org. So It's possible that the cluster portion can be wrapped
in to like into the context of the of the ongoing activities.
14:27:40 Hello. Yeah. So, so for example, if Pierre is presenting on Otis,
which makes some sense, he could also.
14:27:51 Right.
14:27:54 Yeah, maybe.
14:27:51 Present on that's okay with me too. It would be an additional
it'll be get an additional context because he can say look I'm part of this
project.
14:28:01 And we're doing all these things and also I see a natural
connection to semantic harmonization cluster and we sort of, we're
interested in marine data and so forth.
14:28:11 So that that would be fine with me and Adams another natural.
There's you there's you data you know marine data so
14:28:20 Or someone else.
14:28:21 And maybe, yeah, so maybe it could, that, part can, yeah, be
wrapped into the context of.
14:28:27 Great.
14:28:27 The presentations at the beginning. But maybe we can make that.
Like explicit as part of the presentation.
14:28:34 Yeah, the one part that doesn't wrap that easily. Is, is the
committee. Semantic technology committee.
14:28:46 So I have to admit I'm not that familiar with the SPA technology
committee because yeah I interact with you guys and
14:28:55 Omar is in charge of it. He's kind of interested. He has a student
working on trust.
14:28:59 I just thought I put it in there because I wanted to give he's a
wonderful resource for ESIP.
14:29:02 Okay.
14:29:04 I wanted and and because the committee essentially overviews a
lots of semantic things obviously and so They might be it might be nice to
have him as a discussion of something like that.
14:29:15 Just just to say a few words about how we saw semantic technology
playing a role within the ocean decade.
14:29:24 So maybe.
14:29:26 Yeah, so maybe that could just be a present like a like a
standalone presentation there. Just within the other ones and then, and
then inviting, cause one of the panels will be on, right?
14:29:39 Trusted data networks and so maybe.
14:29:42 That was the proposal. I wondered if anybody had a better one. I'd
be willing to sort of.
14:29:48 Modify that, certainly. If someone had a really other topic that
they took would be a dynamite, panel.
14:30:02 Yeah.
14:29:57 The trust certainly plays into the overall theme of the the winter
meeting or the January meeting. So that's the placeholder.
14:30:07 That we could do something with. But if somebody else has a
dynamite thing, I think we should go with it too.
14:30:15 Sure, but I think that was pretty pretty good. I was yeah, can't
keen on hearing that one.
14:30:25 And then also the second one we had, which was just the expanding.
The metadata to include, right?
14:30:30 I myself, I think that should be the first panel. We're doing one
panel after the other, right?
14:30:36 Yeah.
14:30:36 I think I think the oldest one should be first actually.
14:30:40 Okay, cause it flows from.
14:30:41 Myself. It's a natural, yes, that's right. We built up to it.
14:30:47 Huh. Yeah, that makes sense.
14:30:47 And I just wanna. Like you all know better than I do. What's
needed to set the stage.
14:30:56 However, I wanna make sure like time will go by way faster than
you think it will. So, you know, if we need to hear from somebody from each
collaboration area, that's cool.
14:31:07 But if there's a way to synthesize, you know, if they're really
just kind of expressing their interest, if there's some kind of summation
of their input that maybe isn't necessarily a full-on presentation before
you get into your panels.
14:31:20 That could also be a value or, you know. I don't think that. You,
Carolina, would be bad at summarizing that on behalf of most of their most
of those groups or have it on a slide or just you know every time you
transition speakers it gets it takes time so just make sure you do it very
when it's really necessary.
14:31:43 I don't wanna cut any one of them out, but I think they can give
input without necessarily standing up and speaking.
14:31:48 Okay.
14:31:48 And I would say like in the case of Marshall, like, yes, it would
be interesting to hear what he thinks.
14:31:54 Semantics can contribute to the Ocean Decade program. But I don't
think that his main interest is being there to say that I think his main
interest is in, you know, contributing to one of these panels later on and
the speaker that he's proposed for that.
14:32:10 So I would just kinda like try to. Don't be afraid to make those
hard decisions.
14:32:15 Okay. Okay.
14:32:16 It doesn't need to be like perfectly divided evenly amongst all
the collaboration areas. If that's, if you know what I mean.
14:32:27 Yeah, that's helpful. So maybe when we look at the agenda and the
speakers, if there are.
14:32:32 You know, too many and it's just a Just for the sake of having a
placeholder, we can wrap it into another presentation, but then say if you
want more, you know, there will be more discussion in the panel or this is
a guest at the panel or something like that.
14:32:49 Exactly. And I mean, I'm looking at this with very fresh eye like
I've. I might be missing something here about your breakdown time, but I
that's just the impression I'm getting is you're already kind of squeezing
yourself here.
14:33:00 Yeah. I think that's good. And I know that's, that's helpful. I
mean, the reason we're having the different sessions is to like, to
streamline a little bit, right?
14:33:15 So yeah, it is okay if there is something represented in the
panels that is just maybe introduced in the first session without having a
lightning talk about it.
14:33:25 I think that makes sense. If needed. Yeah.
14:33:30 Oh, I made a note in the document about this. Maybe is there a
third panel on this on just like semantic harmonization because there's
kind of this section down on
14:33:45 Page, what page is this?
14:33:49 Oh, I can't see. I can't see what page I'm on, but it's.
14:33:54 I'll just count.
14:33:58 It's on the fifth page. And, it says semantic harmonization and
then there's some, bullet points.
14:34:05 And.
14:34:09 Could that be a third panel? Assuming
14:34:18 Yeah.
14:34:22 Like I know it's related.
14:34:26 It's related.
14:34:30 Or should that be wrapped in to the? First panel or second. Yeah.
I'm not sure actually.
14:34:41 It's maybe I'm, I think I can make an anchor and then send a link.
14:34:48 Can I do that?
14:34:57 Okay.
14:34:50 Darling, I'm really sorry, but I need to drop off now for another
conversation. I think that this sounds like it's right on track and my only
advice would be like you all are the 4 who showed up today so don't be
afraid to make some hard decisions based on what you think is best.
14:35:06 Okay.
14:35:06 I know you're wrangling a whole group, but you have to go with the
people who are here and willing to put in effort and you know.
14:35:14 Loop in a few of those other folks but don't necessarily wait for
all of their input. That's my 2 cents.
14:35:21 Thanks for those 2 cents. I, yeah, I think we should I think we
should go for it.
14:35:26 I think it's I think it's helpful. I think there's enough. There's
enough arguments for why this is gonna help that I think we should go for
it, but thanks for the support.
14:35:39 Yeah.
14:35:37 Yeah, there's still lots of there's still lots of time to shape
too, but like trust your gut, you're headed in a good direction.
14:35:44 Thanks. Okay, bye.
14:35:43 Okay, have a good day.
14:35:49 Are you comfortable with that? I know you. Put a lot into the
initial session. Structure.
14:36:02 Are you muted maybe?
14:36:08 Yes, I was muted. Something came on on another. Another channel so
I had to mute myself.
14:36:14 Yes, I'm comfortable with everything that's been said here.
14:36:16 Okay, good. Hi, I honestly think it's gonna be
14:36:23 Way more manageable to man. I know it's counterintuitive like 3
sessions instead of one, but the one session like keeping everything in
there, maintaining momentum, like having the agenda be cohesive across all
the topics, the various levels of sort of like depth and understanding
needed to participate in each conversation.
14:36:48 Honestly was gonna be harder than to just divide it up and let the
audience self regulate a little bit in what they want to participate in.
14:36:57 So. I feel pretty I feel pretty strongly and pretty good about the
direction it's going now whereas I felt a little overwhelmed before so I
think I think we're going in a good direction.
14:37:09 Yeah, I agree with Megan also that time management on this is very
important. That we have to think we have to think about.
14:37:13 Yeah
14:37:16 A lot. Of discussion and understanding and not trying to cover too
much.
14:37:26 Yeah, yeah. And that'll and then I think too. Yeah, like.
14:37:35 The first session is where we can kind of put in everything in the
kitchen sink. You know, like everything that needs to be introduced, I
think it can be very high level.
14:37:45 I think that gives us flexibility to then like focus like. Yes,
higher quality. Discussions and audience participation in that second
session where it's like We really need to make sure that.
14:37:59 That a discussion is, supported.
14:38:05 . That
14:38:05 Yeah, you described the sessions a little bit as a funnel. It's a
little bit different, but it has a funneling thing.
14:38:08 Yeah.
14:38:11 So it's it's like giving the big pictures so you have you have all
the ingredients and then you have panels that allow some discussion of
important aspects or you get greater depth.
14:38:22 You've gotten that the big picture everything and you've gotten
greater depth in and then the last thing is It can be a little bit
expensive.
14:38:31 Right, yeah.
14:38:29 Okay, so what are you interested in doing? You know, now you heard
everything. What are you interested in?
14:38:36 And moving forward on.
14:38:37 Yeah, I think that sounds great. Like I think, yeah, I think this
has potential to be to have a lot of impact.
14:38:44 I think I think it's good. And I was from the outset like I really
wanted some sort of workshop but I didn't know how to work it in and So I'm
also very pleased with that outcome.
14:39:00 And. Yeah. It's gonna be good.
14:39:06 Maybe. I guess what we will have to do, I know like. I think we
can repeat.
14:39:15 The sections on like the impact and, you know, even everything
generic, the only thing that would change would just be the presentation
section and then the what does she call it?
14:39:32 The Sorry. Yeah, the presenters and like the sequence. And then
the the session level, right?
14:39:44 So it's like no prior knowledge, some prior knowledge. And then
that's where you, I think, Gary, you mentioned saying.
14:39:51 Oh, but helpful to have attended the last session. So we, we can
include that.
14:39:55 Yes, well that would be to me it was the who is this of interest
of the potential audience the potential audience is people who attended the
earlier session wanted to know more So sessions 2 and 3 sort of essentially
sort of always mentioned that you know If you attended this one, the
general one, you might be interested in this follow up.
14:40:18 Yeah. I wonder if.
14:40:18 Because you're prime. This just, that doesn't take much to say,
but I think it was worth mentioning.
14:40:25 Yeah. Yeah. And then maybe we can just make sure to give some
thought to.
14:40:34 Kind of yes, the introduction at each session in case people
haven't been at the previous one.
14:40:40 And then also how much.
14:40:48 Yeah.
14:40:45 We want us. Like if someone could just jump in at the third or
second, like not as an afterthought, but like should we.
14:40:56 Actually, yeah, I just. I, I don't immediately know the answer.
Like, Like, right?
14:41:05 Okay. Yeah.
14:41:04 Should we set them up in a way that someone just say like, hey,
come to one or 3 or you know what I mean?
14:41:09 Yes, yes, this is me.
14:41:11 Or is it like, no, no, it's really a sequence.
14:41:12 It's a special interest to people who have attended before but it
may be that there's a conflicting session that somebody else needed to
attend that didn't even though they wanted to attend one of our sessions
early sessions couldn't attend because there was competing thing that maybe
even participating in.
14:41:30 So, you know, we want to we want to give them the opportunity of
sort of of having a second chance at this Some of it work naturally in that
in that.
14:41:38 Okay.
14:41:39 In the panel discussing bringing more data into Otis how to always
can be expanded. We'd have a natural.
14:41:47 Person like Pierre who will have already presented in the first
session. Who can summarize what might have been new and miss as part of the
panel.
14:41:56 I don't know if he'd be the moderator, but we have natural
resources. I think the sort of bridge.
14:42:01 To make it understandable for people who might have not been able
to. Get the the full thing from the first session.
14:42:09 So then I like that. So then we should. Conscientiously make sure
to bring everybody who attends any of the sessions up to speed enough.
14:42:17 We can see something that would be particularly interesting to
people who tend to session X. But we will make, you know, but it can be,
have the butt, explain that it's open, we'll give context so that it's
understandable.
14:42:33 Yeah. Yeah, I like that a lot. Yeah.
14:42:41 No. Hey, yeah, like we called Barna.
14:42:40 We still haven't gotten rows a cake rather I keep saying last name
but it's just in terms of procedure, we worked on this document that I
think Pier set up.
14:42:52 I wasn't sure if it was exactly right template. Do you know if you
have a template that we I know some of the things will move directly into
it We're submitting a session.
14:43:00 Yeah, I think that was the tablet. Yeah. Yeah.
14:43:02 That was the template. We're okay. So we can just duplicate this.
We can just cut cut and taste out.
14:43:10 Yeah. 3 of them and just
14:43:08 Okay. Alright. Alright, we can. Now that do you have another
meeting with the marine data coming up?
14:43:18 Yeah, tomorrow, yes, at 11. Yeah.
14:43:20 That's what I thought. So I thought so. People might not have been
able to attend today might.
14:43:26 Be able to attend tomorrow.
14:43:29 Yeah. Let's see if. I know I think Matt will be there.
14:43:36 And so he might have some input. And
14:43:42 At some point before January, we'll need some, you know, to.
14:43:51 Like really set the agenda down in in stone and have everybody
kind of commit. Yeah.
14:44:02 Right.
14:43:58 Or commit and we have to make sure that the presenters are
committed. Nothing nothing else comes up or that we have alternatives or
they they get alternatives for us if they something happens that would be
the understanding.
14:44:11 Yeah, that's a good that's a good. Yeah, point is
14:44:19 Do we want that commitment before? No, I don't. Do we want the
commitment before we submit the proposal?
14:44:29 Okay.
14:44:27 You should have an understanding before we submitted saying that.
We need you or the equivalent to present. Are you coming?
14:44:36 Yeah.
14:44:35 Are you prepared? You know, so yeah, we should contact each of the
proposed people like Karen.
14:44:42 Okay.
14:44:41 I mean, I can contact Adam. Anybody can contact Pierre. I can
contact Marshall Ma.
14:44:48 Okay.
14:44:54 Right. Okay.
14:44:49 Who already have expressed interest in having a student on the
panel. The frost pan also. But we, I can see the first session, the first
panel, I mean.
14:45:00 Having 4 or 5 people easily, right? That would be able to the
trust one. Might we don't quite have the full view of that I don't think
yet.
14:45:12 But that can be developed. I can say something. Marshall Mas.
students can say something.
14:45:20 Pierre can either say something or point to it because he had some
ideas on We need a more modern approach to trust than the traditional
criteria.
14:45:29 And so, I, whether he has that all developed or knows somebody
else. So I think we need to flesh out that particular second panel a little
bit, maybe having 3 or 4 people, a moderator and maybe 3 people.
14:45:41 And I, I might be just, moderator for that one if that would be
okay, okay, to people.
14:45:46 Okay.
14:45:46 And then we have 3 good people to talk. And that would be, that
would flush that out.
14:45:53 That sounds good. And then.
14:45:59 Here, mentioned, like inviting. Additional people to represent the
ocean decade. You know, like it.
14:46:15 What's on the, right? Yes.
14:46:16 Organization. Yeah. So maybe asking him Oops. So.
14:46:23 One of the things about that is you're supposed to pay for the
entire Conference, if you're coming, right?
14:46:33 Yeah.
14:46:31 I'm not sure everybody wants to do that, but then they give you
what 2 people are outside they'll let you get have guests 2 people.
14:46:38 Maybe procession. Yeah.
14:46:38 Yeah, we, yeah, we, we can apply for those. And it is online, so
that's helpful, right?
14:46:47 Yes.
14:46:48 That does make it more accessible, even if someone doesn't wanna.
Come for the whole week. Right, since most of the other presenters are
already.
14:47:00 You know, attending and you said numbers, we could probably apply
for. Getting a guest.
14:47:06 Yeah.
14:47:10 So maybe reaching out and seeing what. Here.
14:47:16 Or at least 2 types of guests that I can think of. One, you know,
one is a person who's sort of involved with some of the projects that we
wouldn't normally.
14:47:27 Here, the other is a person who might be higher up. Who would
benefit from knowing all the things that ESIP is doing related to the ocean
decade to give them a view of it
14:47:41 Someone can you elaborate on that? Someone higher up.
14:47:46 Well, someone in the in UN involvement something is higher up in
the organization of UN decade and funding and that type of thing.
14:47:53 Hmm.
14:47:55 So that they get an idea about what ESIP is doing. And they could
give us a perspective on what they think is needed.
14:48:01 Hmm.
14:48:03 You know, here we are in this part of the decade and wherever we
want to go. And ESIP might, you know, able to contribute to that.
14:48:09 So that might be another type of person to get.
14:48:11 Yeah, that would be cool. Yeah. So.
14:48:18 Okay, so that's I wonder is that So sufficient to just kind of.
See what peer, wants to.
14:48:33 Parent stocks might be the person. People that are involved in
projects may have this connection. And may have a good idea about who was
an influential person that they'd like to get some the attention more of
your attention.
14:48:33 So okay.
14:48:52 Yeah, so maybe sending out.
14:48:47 So peers definitely one person, but there may be others of our
presenters who has No idea. I mean, Adam and Woods Hall may have, Adam at
Woods Hole may have some idea.
14:48:59 Yeah, so maybe more of a canvas the current presenters and say
like hey any yeah Yeah.
14:49:09 Yeah, okay.
14:49:04 So let's ask each the exactly who would be a good guest. Either I
guess to contribute technically or a person to sort of get the sort of give
us the big picture and what they need and we could you know Give them the
ESIP story a little bit.
14:49:20 Yeah.
14:49:21 Yes, the presenters would might be asked that question.
14:49:26 Okay.
14:49:25 Then we cover a runoff. Lots of candidates.
14:49:29 Okay. Maybe, yeah, well, max 2, I think. Okay. Yeah.
14:49:39 Seeing with John and Nancy are here. I'm wondering if they have
anything to suggest for improvements or other ideas and in terms of how
this might, how this might sound to you.
14:49:50 What you might add
14:49:53 Well, and just a caveat I have to leave in 10 min. But, you know,
I I'm not a nurse scientist, so I'm a computer scientist and I've been
address this group several times with regard to the sort of vocabulary
building system.
14:50:13 That, Ruth Door is used and, Pete, Pierre was involved in the the
yams.
14:50:23 Dot net to serve, you know, it's a kind of a tried the aims to be
stack overflow.
14:50:25 But Stack Overflow is to developers. This would be yams.net would
be for metadata, vocabulary development.
14:50:35 And the idea was like, semantic really, you know, getting it the
hardest semantic. Harmonization.
14:50:41 But the tool is truly cross domain. I mean, it's like domain
agnostic, but it's got.
14:50:47 GEEP application and has been a fairly good track record. With
what for example Ruth Schuer has done.
14:50:55 So I'd I'd be interested in showing up and offering to present on
this channel, but I don't know where it fits.
14:51:02 Thinking maybe the workshop and now if if Kate comes here workshop
on developing C MAC vocabularies or any other vocabulary.
14:51:14 This might be a natural. Place for it.
14:51:17 Yeah.
14:51:18 Yeah, so I'm happy to participate as I can and. That are you know
up to I don't.
14:51:27 Don't exactly know where I would suggest it it goes.
14:51:32 Would you be willing to like do a demo and in the workshop and
invite. You would
14:51:39 Sure. Hey, to and to invite.
14:51:43 To invite. So I don't know how this would be structured, but to
invite people to use the tool and maybe right so I think the workshops will
be sort of like some sort of live demo of using.
14:51:59 It tool or whatever. And then. I'm hoping that then people would
be able to test it out live with people with experts present.
14:52:14 Is that?
14:52:13 Yeah, that would be fine. Yeah, the tool I just jammed the URL
into the
14:52:18 Yeah, yeah. So. Like, I think I'm a great candidate for someone
who would like a workshop right on the, on, and to see how, how.
14:52:31 It works in real life and maybe having my own use case and or and
if not like even just having a demo is it's incredibly useful even if
people don't have something to do live.
14:52:44 Sure. Yeah.
14:52:44 So the panel. That discuss. More data for Otis, right? One can
think that there's going to be a range of vocabularies from that type of
look.
14:53:01 Look at the various parts of of the ocean the marine data and the
ocean data. So for example, even deep ocean probably has different
vocabularies.
14:53:12 Then other parts of the Marine community. And so there's a natural
interest maybe. In saying okay so if we are looking at a whole range of
vocabulary How might we find out how they're related now similar they are
and in preparation for them?
14:53:27 Going into Otis in a standard way. So there may be a natural
bridge from that whole discussion. Panel one to this and to see if people
are interested in that and maybe some people representing several different
vocabularies.
14:53:43 Which essentially can get together and say, you know, this is what
I'd be interested in doing.
14:53:47 How would your tool help me do that?
14:53:53 Again, it would be helpful if we had Kate here because she
represents one such vocabulary. Right.
14:54:01 Maybe a little conversation with Karen Stocks to see if she can
suggest a vocabulary or 2 their community doors would be interested in.
14:54:15 So the Yams. . It has a, so there's
14:54:35 Yeah, essentially it's a It's purely a kind of a micro service, a
substrate.
14:54:43 It's allows you to propose terms and definitions. It's very
democratic. Then the community can come in and upload and download things.
14:54:53 Think of reputation based voting like Stack Overflow. And say, you
know, we, you know, we have, you know, Ruth Stewart gave us a bunch of
terms from the global cryosphere watch.
14:55:06 So there are 28 definitions of glacier. There. 13 definitions of
fern, you know, old snow.
14:55:16 And there they said we need help. We'd like to, we don't need all
these definitions, but we don't have a good way of choosing the best one.
14:55:23 So we'd like to have people, this community stare at these things
and play around and comment and I'll put down vote and maybe some winners
will emerge and maybe they won't.
14:55:34 It'll be a kind of a Let's see. So it's not a standard. It's not
an ontology.
14:55:42 It's more like a big candidate of terms that people who are
creating standards and ontologies can pick and choose from.
14:55:46 And reference they can actually reference these persistent via
persistent identifiers right into the. Good vocabulary.
14:55:56 And, But it sort of takes a big bite out of. Vocabulary and
standards development.
14:56:03 It doesn't. Replace it just helps. That's the idea.
14:56:07 So, would add from a semantic commonization point of view. Is if
if this thing is populated by a number of people.
14:56:15 So that their alternate definitions of a particular concept. We
can now come in and look at that and try to say we are going to create a
harmonized definition.
14:56:25 That we think we can maximize. And relate to an ontology like
Envo. For some other one.
14:56:33 So that it allows you to sort of take the big picture in and do
the best you can in terms of standardizing this thing.
14:56:39 And saying, okay, so now this is the harmonized definition and in
the process of doing that we may have decided that there were things in
there that required sort of a additional term be created because it wasn't
covered in all the definition.
14:56:57 So sometimes you'll subtype things. So it allows it to be sort of
a workspace to begin your semantic harmonization.
14:57:03 You can.
14:57:04 That's the way I view it. It's a low entry. Yeah, it's low entry,
it's easy, easy.
14:57:07 Yeah, it's pretty quite neutral. Low entry democratic. You can put
crap in there.
14:57:12 And it allows you if you Yeah. Good points off.
14:57:15 Yeah, but the crap will sink to the bottom of the search results
and the good stuff should. Yeah.
14:57:21 Yeah.
14:57:25 You're gonna stay on. Past the hour just in case there was an hour
there was a time change in europe that people didn't take into account or
whatever.
14:57:34 Right.
14:57:36 Or if somebody had an hour long and it's gonna come in. But you
know, if no one comes in in.
14:57:42 7 or 8 min. I think we can sort of give back the time and leave
Carolina prepare for her meeting tomorrow.
14:57:49 Okay. Yeah.
14:57:49 And and proceed to divide this. Work into 3 chunks that will. I
work on that. How much time do we have to submit this?
14:58:05 So we have about a week.
14:58:00 I think it was like the thirteenth or the seventeenth. Hold on.
Yeah. Yeah.
14:58:11 So we will see how well we do by between now and Friday.
14:58:18 Actually, November thirteenth. Oh, okay. Yeah.
14:58:23 Less than a week. Right.
14:58:23 So that is coming up. Isn't it? I think is that Monday? So I do
that now.
14:58:31 Yeah.
14:58:30 But we have a fair amount of information, so we just have to
divided and
14:58:36 Good. Like, yeah, I think between by the end of the week, yeah, I
think I can.
14:58:40 Wouldn't be nice if we had a few more of the Ohus people looking
at it to add some of their their thoughts to it.
14:58:52 You can just slot in a presentation and I, yeah. I think we'll get
someone.
14:58:59 If you're comfortable, uncomfortable, that's okay.
14:59:00 I think it'll, Yeah. I think it's good.
14:59:04 So Nancy, you've been on mute. Is there anything you from your
perspective that you want to add?
14:59:14 I've been out of town a lot so I haven't kept up with what's going
on so when if you get something written I can read it or.
14:59:24 You know, see if it's clear to people.
14:59:24 I mean, I provided a link in the chat to the document that we Sort
of thoughts into.
14:59:32 Yeah, that's the current working document. It still needs some. Oh
wait, no, I'm sorry.
14:59:40 That's that's the wrong link. That was the That's the call for
sessions from, this is the working.
14:59:51 Yes.
14:59:48 The second link in there is, the working. Oh, proposal.
14:59:56 But we've, have not yet split it up into the 3 sessions. So
that's, still.
15:00:04 To be done. And We'll circulate that. Yeah, for sure.
15:00:12 When ready.
15:00:20 You're smiling, but that was nice. Okay.
15:00:19 I'm feeling good about this. I think I think it's good. Yeah. Yeah.
15:00:23 Yeah, Now it's really interesting, so I'm anxious to see what you
know what it all is.
15:00:32 Good. Yeah. How are you?
15:00:33 You're going to be attending
15:00:36 Well, how much does it cost?
15:00:41 I don't know, did they? I don't know if they
15:00:45 No, yeah.
15:00:43 I just, I tried to look it doesn't say right now. Yeah, they
charge.
15:00:50 Yeah.
15:00:52 Yeah, remember. 3 54 50, I can't remember.
15:00:57 I don't, I can't either. It's,
15:01:03 Yeah, it is nice to go. On. You know, through work, so. Yeah.
15:01:18 Thank you.
15:01:16 John? Okay. Okay, thanks. Okay.
15:01:14 Well, I have to take off. Thank you all. This looks really good to
me. Happy about it. Alright.
15:01:23 As I said, I'm gonna stay on until 305 to see, But things that
when she said things are running late, you really meant late.
15:01:33 Yeah, right. Yeah, I meant I wanted to touch base with Kate too
and Maybe I'll reach out on.
15:01:41 On Slack and see.
15:01:43 Yeah.
15:01:44 What she thinks about the
15:01:45 You just reply to me about being late. But, and that was almost at
2 o'clock. So I didn't see it actually.
15:01:54 Okay. Yeah, but. Yeah, we have time.
15:02:04 Yeah, I'll reach out to Kate and if you, sounds like you're in
contact with her too.
15:02:12 So, I think it'll be fine and we can kind of figure out where. She
wants to.
15:02:16 She will attend the meeting tomorrow.
15:02:19 Maybe, yeah, I don't know. Yeah, maybe she will. I, that would be,
that would be good.
15:02:25 So.
15:02:26 Just Ruth. Hmm.
15:02:21 You haven't heard of anybody. Yeah. I honestly don't I honestly
don't do as much on slack as some people here use it People seem to use it
regularly.
15:02:34 I get a little bit lost in slack. Okay.
15:02:34 I did, always on there. Yeah. It's so, it's easy to just, yeah.
15:02:41 Feels more real time but
15:02:42 Is Ruth still involved in these meetings?
15:02:46 Oh yeah.
15:02:45 Yes, very much so. She's just some reason she said she was very
busy in November not to expect her to be.
15:02:53 Available. And I don't know what that is, but.
15:02:54 Yeah. I thought she was traveling is that is that right? I thought
she was out of Okay, yeah.
15:03:01 Yes, yeah, I don't know, but is he traveling for work or pleasure?
I don't know.
15:03:07 Yeah, I don't.
15:03:07 She gets involved with NASA every now and then. So. For in NASA,
yeah.
15:03:13 So she might be at meetings or something like that.
15:03:19 Yeah.
15:03:19 She's been involved. You know, we're not, So focused on the
Chrysler anymore, but we've developed some general techniques and interests.
15:03:29 So when you leverage our experience on that. As I was, you know,
I'm just mentioning when John's.
15:03:36 Tool, you know, how it helps the semantic harmonization. It's sort
of a easy entry point into that.
15:03:42 But then there's a lot of analysis. That goes on after that. And
then there are separate tools for like spreadsheets that.
15:03:50 Help you get into ontology. If you that's what you want to do not
everybody is going to do that
15:03:57 Coming up in the harmonized vocabulary might be good enough for
some people.
15:04:03 Yeah, speaking so this is just this Oh, I'll help off, but just a
footnote, I wanna know if.
15:04:11 How's the semantic harmonization cluster? Been at or looked into
the this I adopt.
15:04:23 I know of I adopt it's been a little while since I looked at that
came out of RDA, right?
15:04:31 Yeah, yeah. And
15:04:31 Yeah, so I was I was part of our day for a long time and I
actually had them present so I would say that they are a subsection of they
they have a particular model about how to do Samantha colonization
basically on a framework.
15:04:53 They don't necessarily involve ontologies of a, like, oh,
ontologies and so forth.
15:05:00 Right.
15:04:59 So they essentially they provide some semantic analysis. Not all
that we have done as part of semantic organization and not integrating it
with an ontology necessarily.
15:05:12 That's why I would I would describe it.
15:05:11 Hmm, right, okay. Yeah, that was that is helpful of where that
fits into this. Harmonization landscape because yeah, I was just super
curious about it.
15:05:26 Because the Alison, is, you know, she's very active in the CF.
15:05:34 World and particularly the CF. Standard names list. And then she's
also involved in that group that created that.
15:05:43 And I was, you know, and so now as I'm, I was just, I was curious
where that fit in to this big picture.
15:05:53 And so.
15:05:54 What happens is that When you're doing semantic analysis, it's
like a geometry. What are your assumptions?
15:06:01 You know how you can create different geometry space on different
assumptions. And so we have we have something like Envo which people have
you know essentially invested in quite a bit of work.
15:06:12 Yeah.
15:06:12 And so they had they start with certain. Concepts that are sort of
foundational concepts and build out. So then you sub types involve them,
evolve from them.
15:06:29 Hmm, okay.
15:06:25 The I adopt people don't start from the same type of concepts. You
see, and so, and, and the Oval Foundry is not the only type of this large
family of ontologies we have Dolce in Europe and so forth so there are some
competitors every now and then they get together and we try to put them try
to harmonize them together and that's been very difficult.
15:06:49 Hmm.
15:06:55 Hmm.
15:06:49 To do to get people to agree on a top level that will harmonize.
Lower down levels at the application level.
15:06:58 So essentially I see them as sort of off to one side as opposed to
these big ontology building efforts.
15:07:04 Got it. Got it. Yeah, thank you. Okay.

Gary Berg-Cross
Potomac, MD
240-426-0770


>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-semanticharmonization/attachments/20231109/eb322511/attachment-0001.htm>