[Esip-semanticharmonization] Some follow up to the 2/14/24) ESIP Semantic Harmonization Cluster 2 hour group meeting

[Gary Berg-Cross]

We had some housekeeping activity at the recent semantic harmonization
cluster meeting.
This included agreeing to having only one two-hour meeting on the 3rd Wed.
of the  month and that we start to help  work on
the CMECS terms. (conversation starting around 14:23:47 on the text below)
Brandon was able to attend this meeting and we looked at his spreadsheet
mapping some  CMECS  terms to SWEET.
SWEET -> CMECS matches - Google Sheets
<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1r34bzoIv8U3Zu5TMWHBaX8SSMx-u64pKRali-p279Pk/edit#gid=0>

Some of the conversation about this is in the text below - pardon the
problem getting all the spellings correct.
We also talked about the simple problems with alignment to SWEET, which
lacks enough of the concepts that Envo has.
 And so we looked there too to see some placements and recognized that
there would be quite a bit of development in Envo based on CMECS under the
habitat concept.
If possible, before the next meeting, *Pier might take a look at this and
help us develop a way forward* aligning  CMECS   on the one hand to SWEET
and also to the more difficult concepts in Envo.
 Brandon We'll be developing more spreadsheets and Kate will be looking at
her terminologies. To help Brandon attend a March meeting we have proposed
moving our Semantic Harmonization meeting to the 3rd week of March and
overlapping with the Sweet meeting which takes place at 4 eastern time.
A question was whether Pier would be able to attend this meeting to
facilitate moving forward on the mapping of  CMECS.
We also touched on the relance of OBIS and consideration of other
vocabularies in the marine/ocean area as well as Ruth's interest in mapping
the CMECS cryo terms ( Ruth "And I already know the answer for Hydroform
ICE and all of its children.
15:33:28 I know where those go.....)
As a compromise I might propose that we have the SH meeting start at three
on March 20th rather than two and then continue on into the suite meeting
which starts at four eastern time to see if we can have a nice group
discussion.

Commons and suggestions from  all of this are welcome.
.

Gary Berg-Cross
Potomac, MD
240-426-0770
Saved conversation:  I'm gonna start recording and I guess I should start
by asking if

Megan has information that she wants to convey.
14:10:10 There's a few things I want to say before we get into actual
possible work.
14:10:13 Yeah. I think just, I alluded to it, but I should. Announce it
more.
14:10:19 Formerly that we are having the EC meeting highlights webinar next
Wednesday. February, 20 first at 4 pm eastern.
14:10:28 This will be a really nice summary of what happened at the EAST
meeting and a bit of a a taste of what each session offered so that you can
decide for yourself if you want to go watch the full session recordings
which are now available on the EC YouTube channel.
14:10:44 And I'll put a link in to register for that. And then, second
thing is, we're currently looking for.
14:10:52 Her 2024, Robert G Raskin scholar, which is. For a graduate
student sort of on the intersection between.
14:11:04 Earth science and computer science and of course this is an award
that means a lot to ESIP because of its namesake Rob Raskin who some of you
knew much better than I did but I'll put a link in the chat for that and
appreciate any help in forwarding it.
14:11:21 And then lastly, Brian, I mean, sorry, Gary. I will just point
that, point you to the chat that, Brian has some questions and maybe as
someone who's not always here might be good to.
14:11:32 Chat with him about his interest in being here today.
14:11:35 Right. Okay. So I know that the Carolina has just joined us. She
probably heard the critical part of that, but.
14:11:44 At Caroline's meeting on Marine D, we talked about. The 3 sessions
and how to present those.
14:11:53 Next week. So I would offer to do the one panel one, the middle
one. Session try to summarize that so Carolina doesn't have to do
everything but and fit it all in.
14:12:06 So I would prefer to have 3. Presentations if possible. For next
week. So that's one thing I wanted to.
14:12:15 Least put out there as a possibility.
14:12:19 And that's fair since you had 3 sessions. We can give you 3
slides, 3, 2 min.
14:12:24 Blocks and you can let me know who will do which.
14:12:27 Yeah. So this is our chance. I'm excited to talk about that a
little bit.
14:12:33 Caroline, have you any more thoughts on that?
14:12:36 No, I have to get that buttoned up this week and figure out who's
gonna do it.
14:12:43 I wanted to check in with Joseph. I haven't had a chance to do
that yet.
14:12:46 Okay.
14:12:47 But if that but. That sounds good to me if you wanna do split it
up into the 3 sessions and if you wanna.
14:12:54 Do the second. Yeah. Yeah.
14:12:54 Well, at least I need to do this. I at least do the second one.
You know, one of the problems about this is passing the batons around and
makes it messy.
14:13:02 But I think because there's enough detail in each of these
sessions, quite a bit as a matter of fact.
14:13:11 Yeah.
14:13:07 It's better to have them each have an opportunity. However, they
do they are related so that you know it is something of a baton passing of
basic setup, a discussion of trustworthiness and all this.
14:13:21 Perspective somewhat and then sort of the richer follow up that we
had of which John was part of and Pierre was part of and and so forth.
14:13:30 So I don't know that last session, you know, that might be. The
most challenging in a way to.
14:13:36 To do justice because it was creative. Okay. But then any of it,
we, we can work on that offline.
14:13:43 Yeah, well. Okay, that, yeah, we'll work on that. For what it's
worth, the 2 min is super fast.
14:13:52 Yes. Yes, some of us are not so good at that. I don't think I can
handle it.
14:13:51 Like it is super. Yeah, last year and it was or whenever the last
one. Yeah. And, Okay.
14:14:04 It's something like 2 min is I script it out and then I just read
the script so it's guess if it's not robotic but that's the only way to
stay within the 2 min.
14:14:09 Giving my slow responses to things. I have one other announcement
that I wanted to make sure that Ruth, my co-chair here has an opportunity
to say anything but We've been talking about limiting our monthly meetings
to 1 2 h session of which this is a due hour session.
14:14:27 Normally we had the second Wednesday and the third Wednesday and
because we finished the paper and we wanted to work on things like Kate's
vocabulary.
14:14:38 We thought that the 2 h session would allow us to do that. And a
few other things along the way.
14:14:43 And so, but that's sort of been the discussion. We've never had,
you know, everybody that's interested in this this area, cement the
conversation on here.
14:14:53 But unless we hear unless unless we hear something else. We
wouldn't have a meeting next week.
14:15:00 I don't think we need it, but we would have a 2 h meeting the
second week of March.
14:15:05 So, any comments on that?
14:15:11 Well, I could just, I'm not sure if it's on that specifically,
but, the general sense of what's next, which I think was probably.
14:15:23 I don't know if anything happens since the meeting. But I think we
ran out of, you know, like what are the next steps?
14:15:30 Do we have a possibility or a set of I think my guess is that we
don't know what the next steps are, but do we have a way to?
14:15:42 Start to consider what the next or to reach what the next steps
might be.
14:15:47 I can start on that in Carolina, you want to continue. We're,
Megan, for example.
14:15:52 At Carolina's meeting, marine data, we had peer available. And
others and there are at least 2 actions that we talked about.
14:16:01 Following up on based on the the conference specifically. Also
what there is some work sort of getting some additional data marine data
into Right.
14:16:13 And so that's going to be collaboratively worked on. And then as
I, I think I put in the email on here.
14:16:17 There's a meeting at the end of February. I think it's the 20
eighth or so.
14:16:19 And which is going to be an opportunity to talk about training on
how to do that.
14:16:25 So those are specific follow ups. I think will lead to other
follow-ups. Carolina, do you have any more to say about that?
14:16:33 Yeah, no, that's, that's exactly right. And, I think it's, I can
try to dig up the, the GitHub issue where they're talking about that
training for the the at the end of the month.
14:16:46 At, I think it's on the I use GitHub. And.
14:16:51 Yeah, so we were kind of gonna record that and then try and see if
at the next Ring Data Cluster, all we could.
14:17:00 Use that recording to try to encourage people to try to recreate
the process. And then one other thing that, you just sparked my memory is
We were gonna see if at the.
14:17:13 Schema.org cluster if they would host a sort of high level. call
on yeah, yeah.
14:17:22 Yeah, I had to do it. I had to do it. How to do so, right?
14:17:26 How to do so, so yeah, but like Like a like a higher level and
then to tie that into this like practical implementation.
14:17:36 But I think Ruth, Are you?
14:17:38 Yeah, I, I actually have a question. I didn't attend, your telecom
Carolina.
14:17:47 A lot of people.
14:17:45 I always have a conflict, but anyway. Yeah. The question I have is
that I was contacted.
14:17:53 I think it was last week. By the folks from the World Data Center
in Information Technology Office.
14:18:01 Who were interested in putting in a session to. The UN,
14:18:12 World data conference or something rather it's in. Meeting. Why
anybody would want to go there?
14:18:20 I don't know. But anyway. And the session would be on, and they
were thinking deliberately of basically ocean data.
14:18:30 And care principles. And specifically they were wondering if the
schema. Org folks would, our social folks would come up with basically.
14:18:44 Recommendations for how to. Basically do the.
14:18:52 Tk labels and such and in data, particularly oceans data, etc. And
I don't know what happened to that, but they were trying to get Pierre
involved because he he's apparently been talking to the local context.
14:19:11 Folks. Who came up with the traditional knowledge labels and and
badges and stuff.
14:19:20 So I was wondering if that was at all a part of that conversation.
Or it was it strictly, the existing so-so materials.
14:19:31 Because I promise to go and make the social folks think about care.
14:19:37 I had to her next.
14:19:45 The conversation on the traditional labels. That I'm aware of is
the one that took place with you at the conference, the session 3 itself.
14:19:55 That's what I was aware of.
14:19:59 Okay. This happened after that.
14:20:05 Okay.
14:20:00 Yeah, so I'm not aware of any follow on. Myself but that again I'm
not connected to the UN like a peer is.
14:20:10 Okay, thanks, Caroline. I see your note.
14:20:16 Yes, connecting I use. Into Otis.
14:20:23 Right.
14:20:23 So Ruth, what do you? What do you need? To in order to move that
forward.
14:20:34 What?
14:20:35 Well, I just need, I just wanted to know who is doing. What? This
specific promise I made was to actually go talk to the SOSA folks about the
TK labels.
14:20:50 Hello.
14:20:50 Which is basically a metadata thing that you add. To your
metadata. Declares, you know,
14:21:01 What the rights are in regards and limitations are in regards to
indigenous data sovereignty and and that sort of stuff.
14:21:12 So. But since you were talking to Pierre and you were talking
about more Otis stuff.
14:21:23 And since that's exactly what they were talking about in this.
14:21:30 We're data center saying, I was wondering if they were in sync or
not and it kinda sounds like maybe not.
14:21:39 Maybe not. Yeah, maybe not. Maybe not. Yeah.
14:21:41 Caroline, you have a you probably saved off a link to the
conversation from last week, right?
14:21:48 That was for between yeah Matt and so this is Matt and Yeah.
14:21:53 Yeah, so you could just share the link in case Ruth wants to see
if there's anything in there I don't remember anything or you could save
that you could save the You could use the text and search for those terms.
14:22:04 I don't remember it happening myself, so.
14:22:08 Yeah, I don't think it's
14:22:15 Yeah, I don't I don't think it's all coordinated yet. Like all the
different.
14:22:22 Yeah.
14:22:22 When is the next SO meeting coming up? I mean, that would be an
obvious place to. Address this and just make sure they know that you want
to talk about that.
14:22:30 Yeah, I think it's on the 20 s.
14:22:32 Yeah, exactly. I'm not sure if they'll be meeting though
sometimes, those canceled.
14:22:36 Yeah.
14:22:38 Oh, that's We should, we should, I don't know.
14:22:41 Yeah, they seem to be in a they seem to be in the mission
accomplished. We did our stuff now to use it.
14:22:47 Sort of mode.
14:22:48 Well, and if you reach out to, and, Adam Shepherd, you know, he'll
have the meeting if there's a topic.
14:22:53 It's just sometimes.
14:22:53 Yeah, I agree. He's always very responsive. Ruth, do you have
anything else to say as the co chair in terms of Procedures and so forth.
14:23:07 It's fine with me if we go down to one meeting a month. If that's
your question.
14:23:12 And I will.
14:23:11 Okay. Were you, were talking about maybe moving one of the
meetings or leveraging the suite meeting?
14:23:19 So we could have. Other people on this call.
14:23:26 Leveraging the sweet meeting would mean you have talked to Brandon
and gotten his approval to do that.
14:23:30 Yes. Yeah.
14:23:33 And if you have, that's fine by me.
14:23:35 No, we haven't, but it sounds like the other follow on to our
conference. And even prior discussions in semantic organization is to get
into what case vocabulary.
14:23:47 And Brandon is sort of doing related work. As we sort of wouldn't
have it. I go it down 2 tracks. He's working with us.
14:23:54 He's working with Brandon. We'd like to have some opportunities to
sort of all be together.
14:23:58 So this is a challenge because It's later for Pier and then it's
manageable for Brandon.
14:24:05 So we have to see if we can harmonize that in some way. I was
hoping that Pierre would be on this call.
14:24:11 He was on last week and we could we could check with him. Okay,
you have your hand up.
14:24:16 Oh yeah, I was just gonna I guess you pretty much said everything
there, but I'm just Ruth.
14:24:22 Yeah, I was telling the group before you joined. Because there had
been, you know, Pierre had mentioned, I think, at the, at the, marine data
sort of wrap-up session that we had last week and mentioned again about
like harmonizing, you know, some CMAX terms with an endbo and things like
that.
14:24:40 So that's kind of been coming up lately and I just wanted to make
sure that that we do loop Brandon in.
14:24:47 I haven't actually joined any of those sweet working sessions in a
while. I think the last time I did nobody else should have.
14:24:52 But I think that we've kind of all been busy. But yeah, I do think
that if we're going to.
14:24:59 Do any harmonization with Envo that we should first check with
Brandon and see how we can coordinate all this.
14:25:07 Perhaps and help everybody out at the same time. Yeah. Okay.
14:25:12 And just from an ease of calendar standpoint, I would, I would
make an argument for keeping your third week of the month, rather than
rather than this week because this week yesterday was this semantic tech
all.
14:25:28 Session and so de conflicting the week when that happens so
hopefully some of you are free to go to that and then maybe if you meet the
third week at 2 o'clock Eastern or whatever time the sweet working session
is later that afternoon so you could bring any questions that come up you
know you could coordinate between the 2.
14:25:45 That would be my kind of gut reaction.
14:25:46 So I would like to do that for March. I wouldn't do it for next
week, obviously.
14:25:51 Right. Okay.
14:25:52 Right. For March. We'll make that third week the 2 h session.
14:26:00 This is a little bit. Different from what we've been talking
about, but I see that Ruth put it in the link to our paper in process.
14:26:10 What is the status of that?
14:26:17 Still in process?
14:26:18 Okay, that's okay.
14:26:25 Okay.
14:26:21 I don't know how long it takes them to do that last step, but.
Last time I've submitted a paper to them, it took a few months, so you know.
14:26:31 I'm not worried about it yet, but it's that way.
14:26:30 Alright, yes. We're not we're doing other things but I just wanted
to know whether there's any.
14:26:37 Was okay.
14:26:36 Yeah, no, my experience is that yes, it takes a year to get
anything through.
14:26:43 So we've got another 2 months and then I'll be late.
14:26:48 Okay. Any other discussion I might have stopped here? Want to
continue on?
14:26:59 Without peer, I wonder, Kate, is it worth? Talking about the
vocabulary, even even in his absence maybe for the next half hour if we
don't have him.
14:27:13 Because I'm not sure how far we would get. Without his input at
this point.
14:27:19 Yeah, I would couldn't cover that. I kind of feel like, you know,
I mean, You know, Cmex is a vocabulary.
14:27:28 We know that Envo is like a, you know, but it's specific to our.
You know, sort of like mapping needs for ecological math needs.
14:27:32 But you know, then generally it has used to be to contribute to
other like more broader ontologies, the formal apologies like Envo and
Sweet.
14:27:52 Yeah.
14:27:44 So Yeah, but I mean that's basically like the gist of it I think
is just you know what we would like to do is see where what overlaps and
see how see if there are terms that are also in Envo and Sweet that could
help contribute and to C Mix.
14:27:59 You know.
14:27:59 Well, are you aware of the areas of Envo currently? That you think
are most relevant to what you, you.
14:28:06 Well, you know what? I'm yeah, like honestly not that deeply
familiar with, with Envo.
14:28:13 I mean, I think we had sort of like looked at some and done some
harmonization leading up to, you know, when we were writing the paper and
things like that too.
14:28:20 So, but that's been a while. So I would I mean in my mind I feel
like you know since we were sort of working with the Chrysler terms.
14:28:32 And get it and Bruce had been working on that and getting that to
invo and that was kind of like the topic of the paper too.
14:28:43 It sort of seems like I know for sure that like some of those cry
but you know then that's sort of and both contributing towards CEMAX, but
you know there are other areas that we could look at as well just to sort
of Yeah.
14:28:51 Right. Well, if I recall what Pear said, that some people weren't
at the meeting, at Carolina, and for example, Megan might have more to say.
14:29:00 He was talking about things like habitat, species. You want it,
you know, he particularly wanted to work in some of the bio aspects too.
14:29:10 I'll do account, right?
14:29:12 Yeah. And you know, we, like Cmex doesn't identify, discreet
species, you know, it's not a taxonomy.
14:29:22 We don't include like taxonomic. Species at a taxonomic level.
14:29:29 I would say as part of the classification. You know, cause that's
just like sort of a lot to to keep up with and you know we're not the
experts in you know the nomenclature and taxonomy of, you know, marine
organisms and things like that.
14:29:51 Yeah.
14:29:46 But there are organizations that are such as obes and worms. But
CM. Sort of provides then like the environmental context for those species
and for where they exist, right?
14:29:57 So.
14:29:59 Yeah.
14:29:56 Oh, August was definitely mentioned last week. I think that's
where it came from. So maybe this is a three-way connection here.
14:30:04 Including.
14:30:04 Yeah, I think so too and I think that you know there's just sort
of like a so we just kinda need kind of like need to perhaps like work out.
14:30:14 But get everybody all on the same page about what it is exactly
that we want to accomplish and then what's the best way for going about
doing that?
14:30:22 Bye.
14:30:20 And you know, as I said before, if we're if we're all trying to do
some very similar things or work with similar, let's try not to do it twice
and you know.
14:30:28 Do that. So.
14:30:32 Ruth's got a name.
14:30:33 So yeah, I guess, I prefer to like hold off until we actually get
the, are able to get the input of everybody else.
14:30:39 Whose kind of hand up again?
14:30:39 So.
14:30:42 Yeah, so. Hey.
14:30:46 So CMX has terms and definitions, right?
14:30:52 Correct.
14:30:53 So at the very least, that ought to get into suite. One would
think. Or even. Yams.
14:31:02 Yeah. And we had, I mean, John's on here still, I think. So.
14:31:10 I mean, I guess it just kind of depends on we had gone through and
I've worked with Brandon a little bit, you know, he had that Google sheets
set up and I think that you and I worked on that right and we worked a
little bit on, the issues that he has in GitHub.
14:31:23 That are CMX related and, I'm not sure that's finished finished,
but.
14:31:29 But that's something that we can continue. And then so, yeah, I
guess I don't.
14:31:34 I'm not sure, and I don't know if this is, I don't know if, suite
is already connecting with Envo in some way or you know what the
differences or the similarities are there yeah, you know, so.
14:31:50 Yeah.
14:31:48 Oh, I can answer that one. I can answer that one. Yeah, they're
not planning on connecting directly.
14:31:55 What's happening is Brandon is, importing the, and vow definitions
that are.
14:32:03 In sync, but They're planning on using SSSM. And not.
14:32:11 In porting and though terms and axioms into suite, just a
definition.
14:32:20 Yeah. Right, right. And I feel like that might be probably, if
I'm, you know, my understanding of this is like pretty limited, but, but I
feel like that might be a better avenue as well for C MEX simply because
SMEX has its own structure and so like that, you know, which is different.
14:32:40 It's a different organization and a different sort of like matter,
mapping. Between terms then.
14:32:47 Yeah.
14:32:46 I'm quite sure that that's that's what.
14:32:53 Yeah.
14:32:51 Would vote for is one you getting the CMX terms and definitions
into sweet. As term names and definitions.
14:33:01 Yeah.
14:33:01 But then, but then doing the same kind of harmonization thing as
we did for, the GCW.
14:33:09 Yeah, so.
14:33:09 IS fair term.
14:33:09 Yeah, so yeah, so it'd be really good to sort of like, you know,
map out that workflow if everybody's like agreeing on that.
14:33:17 You know, and then kind of before we start, you know, jumping
into. You know, digging into discussing.
14:33:25 Well, it's.
14:33:26 I don't think so.
14:33:25 Well, Well, so I'm also some showing something that we can sort of
start with also before we get into the sweet side and and those vocabulary
mappings.
14:33:37 This seems to be a big area within Envo. That we would look for.
To see how well it matches up to your vocabulary.
14:33:46 And some of the some of these, you know, can be expanded. But, I
think that This represents a first look area between Envo and.
14:33:57 Your vocabulary.
14:33:59 Yeah, so you know then we would just sort of like need to I guess
established then like, I mean, but you know, as Ruth just said, if like
Piers.
14:34:10 Preferred or the most efficient way to sort of like harmonize you
know get all 3 sort of on the same page, right?
14:34:18 Seemed and suite and Envo, then if it's sort of a better workflow
to Add the terms to sweet first and then like.
14:34:29 Let Brandon and, Pierre. Do the harmonization between those 2
between sweet and then, you know, then those would be the steps that we
would follow, right?
14:34:41 So.
14:34:43 I don't know if it's a light lift or heavy lift, but the sweet
ontology is already in Yams.
14:34:49 Yeah.
14:34:51 And go is not and C MX is not as far as I know. So that's that's
probably a light lift and if it looks like low hanging fruit and then that
can help the discussion.
14:35:01 To the next stage, that would be something we could facilitate
easily.
14:35:05 Yeah, I think, I was just sort of like curious about like how CMAX
and when we had talked about this before it was just because of the
structure of CEMEX and whether it makes more sense to.
14:35:16 You know.
14:35:20 We've got this very particular hierarchy. Hierarchical arrangement
and you know different components and different classification categories.
14:35:33 So whether or not like YAMS would. Just import it that way or if
you just, you know, would use like a flat list or something like that.
14:35:43 Yeah, you have just only a flat list so that would potentially be
a drawback here.
14:35:46 Yeah. Yeah, well, but I mean, we could still, I mean, it would
still be possible to, you know, I think if you flatten the list, like some
of the categories like the upper level, like groupings kind of wouldn't
make sense as a, as their own.
14:36:01 So. On their as standalone terms but I don't think you, you know,
lose anything at that point, but so it could be done for sure, but.
14:36:10 Yeah.
14:36:14 Yeah.
14:36:11 Brandon's here, so you might want to ask him. About importing CMX
terms into sweet.
14:36:20 It's not quiet. Yes, we, Brandon, can you not hear us?
14:36:27 Yeah.
14:36:30 Hmm
14:36:34 Okay.
14:36:38 I like why it's not here, Brandon.
14:36:46 Okay.
14:36:45 Okay, yeah, we'll wait for him to rejoin, I guess.
14:36:51 Oh wait, I'm here. Can you hear me?
14:36:55 Yes.
14:36:50 Right. Now, yes.
14:36:56 Sorry, I missed whatever you guys were talking about.
14:37:00 Hi everyone.
14:37:01 Hello.
14:37:03 We were talking about you, believe it or not.
14:37:05 That would be confusing if you couldn't hear us.
14:37:09 Okay.
14:37:10 So, the issue is, Kate Rose and C. Max. What should happen to
those terms and are those terms something that for example ought to be
imported into suite?
14:37:34 Okay.
14:37:29 And then the next step or if whatever the stepwise would be would
be to then how does that harmonize with Envo?
14:37:38 You know Pierre had been talking again. Over the course of the
ESIP meeting that we just had.
14:37:44 And other like follow-up calls within the like the Marine data
cluster about, you know, Looking at that again, but since we're all since
we had already started working with SMEX and Sweet I guess my thoughts were
to just kind of coordinate that work, right?
14:38:03 So because we're not really sure what you have planned for Sweet
and Envo, but it would be good to kind of figure out a workflow before we
dig into doing stuff like that.
14:38:16 Yeah. I think that it's as good a place as any for them for the
CMX vocabulary work.
14:38:25 When I actually, so I've been, I have, I think robot templates for
all the definition to add all the definitions.
14:38:34 I need to test it. Test the scripts that I have built but the
point the reason I mentioned is because in digging into the the CMX and the
USGS vocabulary is there.
14:38:43 There's a lot of good information in there. That isn't necessarily
in anywhere else, right?
14:38:52 And so, and so from adding the, when we were, when we had
previously talked about multiple definitions, there's loads of questions
that then get asked about, you know, where where should this be placed in
the hierarchy?
14:39:02 Is this actually a process and that kind of the normal semantics
conversations you have about what things are and where should they go.
14:39:08 So the reason I'm mentioning this is that I think that all that
kind of stuff is kind of coming up anyway.
14:39:12 So if if you needed a if C MX needs a home there's no reason why
it couldn't be It couldn't be there.
14:39:18 Kate, you put. . 3 IDs.
14:39:23 Did you register CMX with W 3 IDs? Is that What I heard from you
last time?
14:39:25 I did, yes. Yep, and I just, uploaded like a public version. To
because I think that Brandon when we were working on this sort of in the
past it was like okay well I'm still trying to work on getting IRI set up,
right, resolvable.
14:39:48 Yep.
14:39:44 So I did set it up and I just added then to the ORR. Today. Like a
version of CMEX.
14:39:52 So those, All the CNIX terms now have like resolvable IRIs.
14:39:57 So that's one sort of. Saying that we were kind of waiting. I
think to before progressing and further work and things like that because
that sort of does make it easier to then just Identify or pull them in or
something so I don't know.
14:40:10 Yeah, they go to OR, right? So it resolves but it'll go to the ore
page or core.
14:40:13 Yes. Right. And so, yeah.
14:40:17 Okay.
14:40:20 I mean, Cmax is always gonna be its own standalone.
14:40:26 Resource, right? Because it's designed for a specific sort of
like, you know, JS application and stuff like that.
14:40:35 But it's out there in the public domain for anybody to like use
those terms definitions and you know that sort of thing.
14:40:40 So in whatever ontologies. Are out there. But, yeah. But so for
now it's on the ORR and I know that like, if need be because now I have the
W 3 IDs, then you know we could move it to a different repository or
something like that if that becomes necessary but
14:41:03 Sorry, what would say the last part again?
14:41:05 Well, if there were like a cause or like a reason to move it
elsewhere or to also put it into another repository. I'm, you know, I'm not
sure.
14:41:14 But right now it isn't a repository. So. Those terms could be
down, right?
14:41:18 So.
14:41:20 Yeah.
14:41:19 Oh, yeah, yeah, sure. Yeah, sorry, I thought I would get I haven't
seen any notification on that.
14:41:26 I thought I was a part of that repo. But anyway, that's not
different. That's a separate question.
14:41:31 Yeah, the, yeah, you're absolutely right. And because you're using
W 3 ID, you can point it at whatever you like.
14:41:37 Yeah.
14:41:37 Or whatever makes sense if it becomes internal at some stage or
whatever whatever that whatever that looks like. But yeah, in terms of
building bindings or mappings across?
14:41:48 Between Sweden and Envo and you know the litany of other
resources. I think that's that would be useful is that sort of something
you're envisioning Kate then it's gonna be a standalone thing and then like
using SSS OM or however it's done, you're gonna carry mappings.
14:42:05 To and from other vocabulary. Other related vocabularies.
14:42:13 Yeah, I would think so. You know, I mean, you know, it's not just
a one way.
14:42:21 It's not sort of like a one way like enhancement, right? Between
like CMEX and Envo, even though that would be probably like the first place
to start, would be to do that, but then we can also look to see what you
guys have in those ontologies and whether or not that's.
14:42:35 Those are terms and definitions that we could add to C MEX, we're
lacking them or whatever.
14:42:47 Well.
14:42:40 So. Yes, I think that was the general idea and I believe that
that's Piers general idea But I think we just spent like over half an hour
talking about like, oh, it'd be really great to get everybody on the same
page before we really.
14:42:53 Bark on this and kind of figure out how this would work.
14:42:53 I have a question a little bit about some of that so I showed a
bit of the Envo relevant areas I think which at a high level, cause some of
them are broken down into more.
14:43:04 Levels. But when I look at suite, I don't see that much about
marine oceans going down very far.
14:43:12 So to me it seems like you're going to be plugging things in. And
only a few spots and then adding a whole bunch under some area.
14:43:20 But that's in the case of sweet but less in the case more
interesting case of Envo.
14:43:27 Brandon, do you have any idea about that? Have you had sort of
looked at? The ocean marine area of Sweden with any I thought about C MEX
as a example.
14:43:49 Yeah.
14:43:38 Not in any depth, no. I mean, sorry for the pun. No, I, I've
looked at it just in with the lens of the other work that that I was doing
with in terms of bringing in the definitions from the other vocabularies
but I haven't looked at What's where and doesn't make sense.
14:43:54 Right.
14:43:54 Similar to and what needs to be added. That was one of the hopes.
That adding adding the definitions from the other vocabularies and seeing
the discrepancies that would help fuel some of those discussions about what
concepts are which which ones need to be forked off into new ones and that
type of thing.
14:44:10 Yes, I guess.
14:44:10 But the reason I say that is because that domain isn't really my
domain. So I was looking at it more from.
14:44:15 Right, right.
14:44:20 Right.
14:44:16 From like you know comprehensive ontology sort of perspective not
does this capture domain knowledge you see them you know what I mean
14:44:23 Right, so I haven't looked at it too much. But it seems to me that
for example a hydrosphere just has Chryosphere and ocean and under ocean
has earth ocean and that's it.
14:44:39 Has little bit more on marine in other words that don't seem to be
classes that make enough distinctions to really put some of the
vocabularies that you might have you'd have to create them.
14:44:52 And the place to create them maybe it would be from Envo it
possibly they might be useful there but you should we should at least look
to see if some of the taxonomy is developed in Envo and can be used.
14:45:05 To organize a suite and also the vocabulary coming in. From C.
Max. So the justice looking at it quickly for me.
14:45:17 I think before the next meeting we should take a. A better, better
deeper dive on that so that the meeting could be productive and have an
idea about where things might fit.
14:45:33 Yeah, that makes sense. I'll just say, sorry, since nobody jumped
in, I'll just say that, had I known that I would have run the CMAC scripts
first.
14:45:43 I was running some of some of the other vocabularies first so that
you could at least look at where there's alignment.
14:45:48 So if that's useful, we can. Yeah, I mean, I can have that ready
for the next meeting if I'm not sure if that's actually
14:45:47 Yeah. Right. Right, I can show what I know of suite. In terms of
this, just to see, people understand what I'm talking about here.
14:46:01 If that's useful. So you know, here is. Coming down from the top.
14:46:07 We have essentially we meet. Realms and we have the coastal region
and they really see there's nothing underneath these.
14:46:17 These are just individual items and that sort of relationships.
Then we get into the hydrosphere and we just have what I said, ocean and
earth ocean.
14:46:25 We don't much. I just here, we sort of have just general things.
Ocean region, we have very, very general things.
14:46:34 Again, that might be the most breakdown. That we have though, and
that's pretty much what I think is relevant and sweet.
14:46:47 So again, my gut feeling is that there lacks some structure that
way you wouldn't quite know where to put the vocabulary items, we'd have to
develop some little bit of classifications or import it from Cmax and the
better to be doing that looking at anvo to see if it has some potential
categories and subcategories that would be useful to us.
14:47:20 Good.
14:47:18 Yeah, I mean, yeah, I agree completely. That's one of the things
that we that we had surfaced in the previous review is there's lots of like
the way C Mix refers to things and the sort of bins that it calls out are
upper level categories, right?
14:47:32 And How was that situated? How was that situated not only in sweep
but an Envo in another?
14:47:39 Structures.
14:47:45 Before you got on, I think we were talking about having only one
meeting for this group. A month and it would be better to have the 2 a
meeting and have it on the third Wednesday and so that would take us into
March when we at least gonna be able to meet again.
14:48:03 And hopefully we can agree on some things we might sort of each
do. To make a good preparation for that meeting in March.
14:48:23 Is that for me, Gary or just in general? Sorry, I, it's fine.
14:48:27 It's still, it's.
14:48:32 Yeah.
14:48:26 You in particular, but it's general in other words If we had a
meeting at this time. Again, in March, would it be possible for you to join
us in at least the second hour or something of that nature?
14:48:38 Or do we need to move the meeting a little bit to make it possible
for you to do it? And you think you could do some of the things you talked
about looking at.
14:48:45 Between now and then so that we would have a good starting point
and the stands where the fit or not fit is.
14:48:52 So the second, the second part of the question is yes, the first
part is the timing is going to be tricky.
14:48:58 The clocks will change. The only reason I'm here now is because my
class was cancelled.
14:49:02 So, so I thought I'd call in. When the clocks change, I'll have to
look at when the meeting is according to when the clocks change in the US
and then I might be able to attend the first hour but this is Yeah, I'll
have to look.
14:49:17 I can't guarantee that I'd be there. Sorry.
14:49:14 Hmm. Yeah. And Megan just point out that there's, I guess, there's
a sweet meeting later in the day or.
14:49:24 On the website.
14:49:24 Yeah, happens to be the same Wednesday as you already have booked
for that session. So if we need to move one or both, that's possible.
14:49:29 So we could, If we could use that maybe.
14:49:37 Yeah, yeah, yeah, you mean use the sweet working session call for
this discussion? Yeah, yeah, yeah, absolutely, absolutely.
14:49:45 If that, I mean, if.
14:49:42 Yes, yes. Because what you're doing is sort of a starting point
with between you and Kate that we need to be aware of.
14:49:51 Yeah, sure.
14:49:57 I mean it would move this meeting. Everyone here would have to go
back a couple hours unfortunately. So I'm not I don't know if that's
doable, but you can use the meeting slot absolutely.
14:50:07 The one I worry about is whether Pierre we need to have peer on
this over time and whether he could make that one.
14:50:14 Maybe we would. Perhaps go back to our. Our. Our slot of 2 to 4
eastern east coast time after that to see if that works better for him but
that's that's to be determined because we he's not on this call we don't
really know his schedule.
14:50:35 Yeah, I don't know either but he's in the EU so it's gonna be on
the order of 12 h difference from where I am.
14:50:41 It's 8 50 am now I'm assuming it's either 8 or 7 or something pm
there so yeah later probably doesn't help him
14:50:41 Right, The cluster does have the word harmonization in it, so we
have to do that at multiple levels.
14:50:55 Including time.
14:50:53 Right on. Okay.
14:51:00 Yeah, so Gary, like I said, either way I can. I can wrap up the
the mapping files.
14:51:07 Okay.
14:51:07 For the next meeting. I can't guarantee that I will be in the
meeting though, sorry.
14:51:36 Occasionally we can maybe move the time a little hour if we know
it's available and things of that nature.
14:51:41 So. I just just trying to get this thing started. And a related
question is what, is there something you could do between now and the March
meeting that would get us?
14:51:51 So that we could have a productive session.
14:52:02 Who are you asking, Gary? I'm sorry. Who's that question for?
14:52:08 Okay.
14:52:05 Well, I was, we were, you know, asking Brandon if what he could do
between now and then and I, to make the March meeting productive and I'm
just wondering whether you can do also something in terms of getting us
ready for Oh, harmonization start between Sweet, obviously, you guys are
talking about, but also we're looking at Envo possibility too.
14:52:26 So is there something you could do in terms of? Understanding the
possible relationships and which which vocabulary items might fit well and
some of these existing
14:52:38 Well, I think I'm gonna kind of go back to river back to, you
know, what we started talking about originally is just like I just don't
have a good handle on the scope of what Pierre is hoping to do.
14:52:48 And what Sweet is hoping to do. And, you know, of course, like, I
can, you know, kind of glance through those.
14:52:57 You know, through Envo and Sweet, you know, just kind of see like
what pops out at me, but you know, I mean.
14:53:05 I'm not sure that I can do much more than that without until we
sort of kind of figure out, you know.
14:53:15 How this needs to happen, right? And what sort of.
14:53:21 If we're using so-so or you know, yeah, because I'm just not sure
about like any of that stuff, but I think Before I really dig in, it would
be really good to, yeah, be able to get on the same page with everybody.
14:53:34 Or to kind of have a better understanding of. What would be
helpful. And what, suite and what info kinda want out of this.
14:53:46 So.
14:53:53 Well, if I go back, at least, and again, my own thinking from
what, I've I've heard also that the easy thing is this mapping of bringing
the vocabulary into sweet.
14:54:04 I raised the issue of where do we put them? Which you might not
have enough structure within suite.
14:54:10 So a look at that to see you know where you would might take some
of your Candidate items.
14:54:18 You look over a suite. And you see the major categories they have.
And then you think about what vocabularies would be underneath that.
14:54:26 That would be a starting point, I think, for me, saying this is
where how we're going to place my vocabulary.
14:54:32 And I thought that there's not enough structure and sweet to do.
The complete job and that we would have to look at alternative structures.
14:54:41 Cmax provides some structures, maybe we want to use that, but if
we did that without looking at Envo, we might be missing something because
it has structure.
14:54:49 So that's sort of my view of what we need to. Be aware of and
understand as we start to do this.
14:54:56 Yeah, but I think that, you know, Brandon's already, you know,
sort of made, May to start on that, you know, and we had worked with him,
you know, a little bit on going through some of those like looking for, you
know, close matches and so on and so forth.
14:55:15 So do we have some examples of that that we could look at?
14:55:11 So either we could just kind of continue that work or like Brendan
said, Okay.
14:55:20 Just a second, I'll grab the link.
14:55:22 Great.
14:55:23 Is it that spreadsheet? The sweet Cmax matches.
14:55:29 Sorry, yeah, sorry. Yes, if you have the link, go ahead. It's in
discussion.
14:55:35 Yeah, yeah.
14:55:35 I'm making you a co-host.
14:55:32 I do. It's been a while in here. I'm gonna pop it in the chat.
14:55:38 I don't. Yep.
14:55:39 So there. So I'm not sure if this is still like a good way to keep
working through this.
14:55:48 Yeah.
14:55:45 I mean, I don't know, it's as good as any. But having said that,
this was just generated from A Python script that I wrote to try and look
at matches.
14:55:57 So if something else is useful, it can be modified. But this made
sense to me at the time.
14:56:03 So, I evoked it, I'm now sharing it. Is it visible? Discuss any
part of it.
14:56:12 Oh, there heaps of them. If you look at the comments, Kate went
through, Kate and I and there were others.
14:56:25 Okay.
14:56:21 I'd have to look at who like the Orchid IDs, but there were others
that went through and there's loads of them that are Like I use the so
sorry for context for everybody who hasn't so I've seen these a lot for
context for everybody who hasn't seen these.
14:56:32 I just, this is just using a regex on labels. With a little bit of
a filter so like a noise filter so it'll so for example absorption and
absorption one will have a B, won't have a D, but they'll come up as close
matches even though they're their opposites.
14:56:49 So there's gonna be some work that needs to be done for anything
that isn't a exact match, similarity of one, right?
14:56:55 That's the an example, you see column F. Means that the labels
were an exact match.
14:56:59 So we were treating this as a massive filtering exercise just to
try and see which concepts might be related or relatable.
14:57:08 Are they, you know, could they be an exact match or a near match
or close match or whatever?
14:57:11 Or if you look at the comments, we have a term match in a lot of
cases, but there's a context mismatch.
14:57:17 Right. And unfortunately, because a lot of stuff isn't in, sorry,
a lot of. You have to look at the sweet hierarchy in many cases or which
module it's in in order to try and glean what is meant by the term which is
the whole reason why we're trying to add definitions.
14:57:35 So anyway, but when you look at that. You as you may gather from
looking at the notes. There's a lot of concepts that don't match, right?
14:57:45 Even though obviously they're using the same label. And that's
what we were trying to do.
14:57:48 We're trying to surface the ones that are a match and add the
definitions. So column H where it says scope note.
14:57:55 That's what the, sorry, why don't actually know who is this the
file is from the USGS, but they don't actually it's not actually their
vocabulary sorry Kate you can get into this bit but anyway we're gonna add
those definitions into suite we want to add them from multiple vocabulary
to try and sort out Where should these terms be?
14:58:11 There's a there's a further. Project down the line. But anyway,
that's why that's what this so this is the first iteration of a mapping
exercise in my mind.
14:58:19 Does any does that make sense to do anybody? That's not me.
14:58:23 So column H is the relative most relevant column to understand the
start with, right? Cause this is what C MEX.
14:58:31 As a definition. Of a term. Right.
14:58:35 Well, that's in their scope note, but I, we are treating it as
definitions. Because it, you, it nearly always is.
14:58:39 Yeah.
14:58:42 And what I was mentioning before, you can, if you look at line
Where's a good one?
14:58:48 I don't know if it's a good one, but I was online 56. So that's a,
that's a dike and suite.
14:58:55 It's in realm hydro. And there's a tag in the the scope note is
geoform colon and then there's a you know, a tabular igneous intrusion
bubble bond.
14:59:04 There's like a definition or a defined some defining text, right?
A gloss. But the fact that they tagged them with things like geoform in S.
14:59:13 I mean, we've had discussions in Sweet about like geographic
features and what's the what's what kind of hierarchies are that or should
they be hierarchies and you know what I mean?
14:59:24 And so I'm wondering if using some of the information in some of
the information in some of the other vocabularies would help inform those
discussions in.
14:59:30 In suite or inbo or wherever else. Does that does that make sense?
14:59:36 That makes sense to me, yes.
14:59:39 Do you know what percentage of the CMAC vocabulary is matched up
with something in sweet?
14:59:46 Oh, I would have to look. I don't think I looked at the
percentage. I just looked at the number of matches.
14:59:51 It's like a hundred 12 rows, 112 rows.
14:59:56 Oh, sorry, we were both talking. Can you repeat what you said,
Gary?
14:59:59 You have a hundred 12 rows. So that would be.
15:00:01 Yeah, there's also a tab that's removed. So they was a whole bunch
of false positives.
15:00:06 Hmm.
15:00:08 There's only 8 in there, or 7 in there now, but there should there
will be more as I go through these.
15:00:13 I was working on the procedural side. So how to get the
spreadsheet into. Like build the matches and build the turtle file.
15:00:21 I haven't actually called the ones that that are need to be called
yet. So there's a bunch of other in the comments where they say come to
term context match and there's one a bunch of them that say like mismatch
from that say like mismatch or not not a match or whatever and that say
like mismatch or not not a match or whatever and those need to be moved to
the C Mix removed or the false positives
15:00:38 table.
15:00:40 But there are still some in this main CMX table. Does that make
sense? Okay. So it's a super messy way to do it.
15:00:50 Right.
15:00:50 I just thought it would be as a as a filter and then. Get humans
that actually know what they're looking at can kind of run through these
things pretty quickly.
15:00:57 Okay, do you have an idea about how many vocabulary items you
have? Cause we have, you know, a hundred.
15:01:02 Bit over a hundred here. I'm just wondering what percentage.
Recovering and whether important things are missing.
15:01:21 You're on mute, Kate, if you're talking.
15:01:27 Give me just a minute and I can let you know.
15:01:46 Okay.
15:01:39 Gonna say 700 and something But they might not. As I was trying to
explain earlier, which I don't know if I'm doing this very clearly, but
some of them are merely, I think some of my terms are sort of like
organizing.
15:01:55 Terms and not necessarily ones that would help.
15:02:00 That would be useful to somebody else, but.
15:02:12 Actually, I'm gonna say like. 1,600 just over 1,600 terms.
15:02:18 With our modifiers.
15:02:18 Okay, so we probably have a little bit less than 10% of the items
here matching up.
15:02:25 Yeah, that was the thought was once this gets sort of sorted out a
bit then to do the opposite and figure out.
15:02:41 Yeah.
15:02:33 For a couple different vocabulary to do the opposite and see well
which terms which terms are in this in this example C MX that aren't in
Sweet and invo or and wherever and do they need to be and where would they
go?
15:02:51 So I do have the obverse. I just don't have it in here.
15:02:49 Yes, I'm guessing that Yeah, I don't know the overlap between in
this particular area, but.
15:02:59 Just looking quickly before it seemed like Envo had more
distinctions. Then sweet.
15:03:12 I mean, so for example, you have a thing like animal, I think, in
your list. And so that's, you know, to me that's not necessarily Marine
oriented specific it's a general so there'll be a lot of general ones but
where you have wave which is you know obviously very specific and relevant
also.
15:03:34 Yeah, I in reviewing these there's a lot of them that have domain
specific context sort of embedded into the to the term, right?
15:03:50 As well.
15:03:46 Which if you're looking at CMX and you know what it is then that
makes it makes sense right but if you're trying to like harmonize across
several, then it would make sense like in the example you just cited Gary
to that they that the animal whatever that, whatever that term was just
animal, they wouldn't have a match.
15:04:04 There would need to be a subclass created to map to. You know, I
mean, like marine animals or something like that.
15:04:08 I don't know. I wouldn't do that. I'm just using this as an
example.
15:04:12 And that's one of the things I'm hoping to point out, like we
need. You know, there needs to be more structure.
15:04:16 More depth, whatever.
15:04:21 Again, did that make sense, Gary, or to anybody else?
15:04:24 Yes, it makes sense to me and Anybody else have comments on this
direction?
15:04:40 I was looking for some things that I know were in in Envo. That
are relevant and reef is one of them lagoon is another so those are Those
are good overlaps and and certainly important concepts.
15:05:30 Yeah.
15:05:34 Yeah.
15:05:22 Try and use something like CMEX where presumably the the You know,
it's covering off that domain versus something like just from the Like the
USGA science terms are from suite or something where you're not sure where
it came from or what the provenance is.
15:05:38 That's it and you're assuming that something in CMX maybe covers
off that. That
15:05:42 Well, that's analogous to what we did with Ruth's vocabulary
because that was that was the, you know, the domain vocabularies.
15:05:50 Various vocabularies harmonized, you know, was was the the rich
part and then we tried to align them with the ontologies.
15:05:59 Well.
15:05:57 And enrich in the anthologies as a result. So that we analogous.
15:06:02 Yeah, yeah, it is, but slightly, but we are further up the track
if you like because when we were doing the mapping exercise for the cryo
terms, Ruth had already done like, well, Ruth is on, she can talk about it,
but there was already a load of work that she had spread sheets she had to
harmonized a bunch of those the cryo vocabularies and then was able to
15:06:24 say don't use that definition use this one or what you know what I
mean and I think we are further up the track seeing at least from my
perspective and some in certain domains saying, you know, you're asking the
question, is there is there one that should be trusted over another one for
certain terms?
15:06:43 I don't have the answer to that, but that's something that's
interesting to me.
15:06:57 Brandon, I think you're right about that. And.
15:07:04 And I guess the issue is that Kate is not. Bringing other terms to
the table, is that correct, Kate?
15:07:20 Non-CMECS.
15:07:20 Other vocabulary other vocabularies yeah
15:07:18 When you say other terms, Meaning. Oh, correct. But I do, I will
point out that, you know, CMACs actually pulls in, you know, I mean, it's
not like we like the, the developers of Cmax like created new definitions
all of their own, you know, they refer to, you know, scientific literature
and sometimes like brought in wholesale like
15:07:43 existing classification schemes. You know, so in that case it's
not that I mean,
15:07:50 So perhaps there, you know, if you are going to identify
provenance and things like that, then you wouldn't want to you could use
CMX as the provenance and then I don't know kind of people would follow on
from that but I and again I think that's sort of on a case-by-case basis
you know there are some areas and some terms where we sort of like modified
a little bit in
15:08:12 order to sort of like make it fit. An ecological purpose and
things like that. But Yeah, I don't know if that's too much for a
digression, but.
15:08:21 Yes. Yeah.
15:08:21 No, that's not a migration. But where is that all documented?
15:08:26 Well, a lot of times it's actually, and especially when SMEX was
for certain, it's sort of like, you know, sometimes for some of the
definitions, I don't think that they were very rigorous and actually like
identifying within each definition.
15:08:46 Citation to, you know, a specific source or something like that.
So you kind of have to dig through the text because it might be in like an
introductory paragraph or you know something like that where they're also
giving like the scientific context for, for the ecological sort of
underpinnings of the terminologies and things like that so and that's
something that I am trying to do as I go
15:09:10 through this is to pull those out and create.
15:09:15 Within the CMX ontology like a separate I think I'm doing like DC
source or something like that to try and like pull out those citations for
each of those terms as well.
15:09:26 So that's really obvious. So that S. Very upfront and you know
about where these terms came from.
15:10:02 Is that helpful or? You guys have further questions about that?
15:10:08 Okay.
15:10:06 No, that was helpful, but it's sounds to me like. You know, that's
and I don't know if that's part of your main mission or not or whether
that's sort of an ancillary thing.
15:10:20 In other words, so it's not at all clear to me how quickly. We're
gonna have, you know.
15:10:26 Hmm.
15:10:26 Provenance.
15:10:31 Yeah.
15:10:36 I think that,
15:10:41 Yeah.
15:10:45 Let's see, and so we had like the original version of SEMAX.
That's what I just uploaded to the ORR today.
15:10:53 And so that's not quite as that's not as far long in those terms.
With respect to the provenance for each of those units.
15:11:03 I kind of just wanted to get something out there that actually had
like the IRI so we could start referring to.
15:11:10 But I have another version in the works. Which is updating and
adding some terms and things like that.
15:11:15 Well, because we've been working with a group of reviewers, you
know, and making some changes and things like that.
15:11:19 And so like in this iteration, I think would be and I can and I
think by the time that we meet next, I can probably have like that sort of
uploaded.
15:11:33 And so those would be and I think with those, I mean, I may have
missed a couple, but that is definitely something that I have been doing is
like pulling out and making sure that we have.
15:11:45 Citations. For each term where they exist and anything that
doesn't have a citation then is I guess, the provenance would be the S.
15:11:56 Document itself or work groups or things like that. So going
forward.
15:12:03 Okay.
15:12:03 Well, I have a I have another question. In the context of what
Ruth's asking about is.
15:12:09 Are you aware of any other vocabulary that overlap here that you
want to take into account as we do this effort?
15:12:18 No, I mean just off the top of my head, I think that when they
were when they were doing this, so you know, when I say that we're bringing
in like other classifications, you know, we're bringing in things like,
like for our substrate component, we're using, definitions from like folk
and from Wentworth which are like just Keystone classifications for
15:12:42 grain sizes of sediments and then also mixes. Of great sizes of
sediments.
15:12:46 And so, you know, there's that. And so that might not be
technically like a vocabulary, more sort of like a classification, however
you do have a term and then a categorical size range.
15:12:59 You know, and percentage of each type as the definition. But I
don't know if something like that or already exists other than, you know,
what was published in the papers that they published, right?
15:13:11 And those have just kind of been in existence since, you know. Oh
gosh, I don't know.
15:13:19 40, s, 50, 60, something like that. So for quite a while, you
know, we pull a lot of.
15:13:27 Other Benthic habitat sort of terminology such as like, you know,
depth zones.
15:13:35 From certain publications, you know, like from Gary Green and, you
know, so they exist in the literature, but I'm not sure if they exist
somewhere as a vocabulary.
15:13:46 Or if somebody else has. Done that. Separately, yeah, I couldn't
tell you.
15:13:56 Yeah.
15:13:56 But, yeah, but it's that sort of thing. There's also, you know,
for a lot of the geo forms, which you know describe, I think perhaps that's
like an equivalent as like a land form.
15:14:07 They relate a lot on you know different things or different
publications perhaps but also Henry relied on this Bates and Jackson.
15:14:18 Dictionary of geological terms and things like that. So, yeah.
15:14:27 Well, I would just mentioned that Ruth will recall this. We would
get into a discussion of something like, and we, you know, we had some of
Ruth's preliminary work on that and we would go and look at other sources.
15:14:42 To try to get a final harmonization. So I'm sure deep deep dipping
into other sources will happen as part of this process too.
15:14:55 Yeah, and you know, and I,
15:14:59 You know, obviously it's important to get the attribution correct,
right? And I think that, that part of you know making it Like I said, it's
if you like look in the text of CMAX, then it's clear.
15:15:13 For the most part, you know, you can tell like where, you know,
they discuss like where these came from, but as far as like pulling them
out into.
15:15:21 Just you know so that every unit you know, term and definition has
a specific attribution is work that kind of needs to be done.
15:15:29 Right. So, and yeah, but that is. A priority for me to do that. I
mean, to me, it kind of seems like an easy thing to do.
15:15:37 So, And yeah, like I said, I think that I have most of them in,
like my next version.
15:15:48 Pulled out but you know I may not have everything so But it's just
going to be like an iterative process.
15:15:53 And I'm trying to actually really make sure that we do that going
forward.
15:15:59 So quick question. And that is, so when you're talking about this
next version, is that 1.1 point 0 in other words, I went over to your
GitHub site.
15:16:10 I'm wondering what I'm looking at.
15:16:12 Yes, it is. That would be it.
15:16:14 Okay.
15:16:16 And that's in spreadsheet form and I have a different but that I
think the version that is on the GitHub does not have all of that
information in it.
15:16:27 Oh.
15:16:25 I have another working spreadsheet. Yeah. That has all that. So.
15:16:32 Bummer.
15:16:33 Yeah. Which I'm happy to share with you guys.
15:16:39 If you prefer in that format, but, yeah, like I said, I'm actually
also going to work on adding it into the ontology or whatever it is that
I'm doing.
15:16:49 So.
15:16:54 Is there any reason why that can't go into the, GitHub site?
15:16:59 Is it just because it's not done yet?
15:17:01 Yeah, it's pretty much because it's just kind of like not done yet
and or the sheet might be done yet and or the sheet might be done itself
but then I need to I don't want to put it up there but then I need to I
don't want to put it up there without also then being able to put it up
there without also then being able to like update the you know like a wiki
that explains
15:17:15 like and read me that explains like a wiki that explains like and
and read me that explains like what all this stuff is so that I don't know.
15:17:20 So that people who don't use GitHub a lot. Get confused about what
they're looking at.
15:17:24 So. That's so that's pretty much it. But I can do that.
15:17:32 That would be cool.
15:17:33 Yeah.
15:17:37 So I did notice that there were sufficient terms in there for the.
About the cryos here that I'd be interested in participating for at least a
little bit.
15:17:47 Yeah, I think that, that we're definitely. You know, and there are
certain areas of C MEX and one of them is sort of like the geoform area
which I think that we would have like crowd terms both within like the
geoform and the watercom component as well.
15:18:11 Yep, you do.
15:18:12 Yeah, so and those are meant to be built upon, right, as we.
15:18:23 I don't know, as people kind of point out things that we've
missed, you know, it's supposed to be sort of like a growing and dynamic
standard that we can adjust.
15:18:31 So.
15:18:33 Anything that's missing, we can certainly.
15:18:40 Put those together and you know that we can kind of take it to the
CMX group and you know.
15:18:45 Adding a term is is not it's not a complicated thing to do. And
that's not, that's not like a really big discussion.
15:18:57 CMX as long as it sort of has, you know, like, you know. As long
as it has like grounding in as long as it fits within like an ecological
context.
15:19:02 Which can be very different from sometimes from say like a
physical oceanographer context. And so as long as it's sort of like fits
within that context and has good scientific grounding in it, you know, sort
of like non-controversial then like adding units it's not a big deal to do.
15:19:22 It just gives people like more choices. For right? So.
15:19:31 Yeah, so that would be like a really helpful thing for us to do
would be to look at this.
15:19:38 I think within our geo form, the same exterior form collection,
some of them we have like terms there, but the definitions aren't very
rigorous.
15:19:45 And helpful. You know, so. They could probably use a little bit of
editing and updating.
15:19:55 So I know we've talked about. Obus as a relevant area. And they
use the Darwin core.
15:20:03 Do you know anything about their overlap between the DAR and Core?
And your vocabulary.
15:20:12 I don't. But I think Darwin Core perhaps is Not quite.
15:20:21 I don't know. Is it not quite as extensive or?
15:20:28 You have a link for that.
15:20:28 Yeah, it's very of the basic. It's very observational obviously.
I'd Brandon has his hand up.
15:20:35 He probably knows more.
15:20:39 Darwin core is for, like biologic entities. What's for a whole
bunch of stuff and there is different subgroups, but broadly speaking,
Darwin Core and like it's Tadwig.
15:20:53 And if you're always, But if I always say it's taxonomic,
something working group, I was free with it anyway.
15:20:59 The point is that they they are I believe they started off being
focused on biologic entities and like where where they were like
observation where they were found.
15:21:08 I forget the word. So that's what it was geared towards and then
there's other ones like mids, which deals with some of the mechanisms
around machinery or like Like sampling protocol and.
15:21:24 And harmonizing across those types of things. I'll have a look
into it. Sorry, I'm not giving a good explanation.
15:21:29 I'll be quiet now, but I don't know if, my I guess my point is
Tadwigs probably relevant.
15:21:34 And if you're interested in Ted Wigg, I would you might wanna ping
Mark Schildower if he still responds to email because he's been trying to
get that.
15:21:44 Moved from like a data transfer format into something that's more
ontological for years. So just a heads up.
15:21:53 Yeah, I thought, Darwin Corps was sort of like a metadata keyword.
15:21:59 Resource like that was focused on biological data, right? So I
don't know, to me, maybe more similar to You see, but more focused.
15:22:05 Yeah. But, was mentioned by, in the Marine data meeting. As of
interest and of to this effort.
15:22:19 So I didn't know if there was a existing overlap. Hmm.
15:22:19 Yeah. Yeah, all this, I think, identifies like the species
occurrence mainly.
15:22:28 Right, right.
15:22:30 But then of course, you know, I mean, those happen at certain
locations that have, you know, environmental characteristics.
15:22:35 You know, and you kind of want to know how like the species are
using their habitat and so you would sort of need to know.
15:22:41 Yeah.
15:22:42 What conditions they prefer that way right so
15:22:47 Yeah, so I don't think that they have like a really super well
developed, ecological kind of so it would make sense that they would use
Darwin Core that is probably more focused on, you know, identifying this.
15:22:56 Yeah. Well, look like it hung up on Darwin. Do you have, habitats
represented marine habitats represented.
15:23:07 As a connection.
15:23:10 Yes, and C. Max.
15:23:08 In C. Yeah, S. Is a vocabulary for taking your observational data.
And classifying it and developing.
15:23:25 Data sets that are, attributed with, habitat terms. And you can,
so yes, we do.
15:23:33 That's what it's all about.
15:23:32 Yeah, but that isn't well represented in Sweet, but it is to some
extent in Envo, I think, right?
15:23:45 Envo is trying to be pretty complete in that area. Yes, that's its
point.
15:23:48 Yes. Right. So, Envo has things like estuaries as a habitat area.
15:23:59 Does Envo have just a habitat class, like a super class or
something like that? Or is it?
15:24:09 I don't know. Again, I think this would be a kind of a good place
where like Pierre could help put us in the right connection, right?
15:24:15 Yeah, yeah.
15:24:36 So yeah, it has a habitat class.
15:24:44 It's they have a ecosystem biome as you might expect an ecological
It has ecosystem, Echo, and so forth.
15:24:54 So it has a habitat class with something under it too.
15:25:03 It's defined as an environmental system that can sustain and allow
the growth of an ecological population.
15:25:14 Part of ecosystem, part of biosphere, determined by population of
organisms. And used in a variety of places.
15:25:24 Good has aquatic ecosystems and Aquatic biomes.
15:25:27 Yeah, yeah, I think that's probably probably a bit better than
what Sweet has. Here.
15:25:47 I guess my only point here is that we could map things over. And
in the process of doing that, we'd probably have to establish something
good.
15:25:57 In suite on habitat, which I'm not sure it has at all. I haven't
checked.
15:26:04 But the point is that you would have many terms that would fall
there.
15:26:16 Yeah, you know, I guess it just sort of depends on like the
approach that
15:26:23 Sweet and info wanna take towards doing that. You know, I think
that there are different ways of doing it
15:26:36 I'm not sure that I understand that.
15:26:42 But.
15:26:45 I mean, your high level concepts are, let's see if I can find
them. You have, you know, these feature things.
15:26:58 Yeah, I think that, you know, to define a habitat, right? I mean,
if you're looking at like ultimately like every species.
15:27:05 Has its own set of.
15:27:09 Environmental characteristics, a habitat that they exist within,
right, where they can exist thrive throughout their life stages and so on
and so forth, right?
15:27:21 And so you know, if you and CMX attempts to give you sort of like
the building blocks to put that together because if you're going to look at
you know aquatic habitats and you know what species use, you need to know
like whether they're using substrate and what type and you know what sort
of like.
15:27:40 Physical chemical like water column properties they prefer, do
they live on certain like land forms, geo forms, and so on.
15:27:51 And so SMEX gives you the ability to do those sort of like bottom
up. Classifications right where you're building them species associations
with all of these environmental variables you can bring them all together
in sort of package thing.
15:28:09 So, into what we call like a biotech. Is the package that we call
it.
15:28:15 So, but that requires the combination of various and whatever is
relevant to that species to those ecological units, right, which are the
lower level units.
15:28:30 The lower and sort of like intermediate level units within our
various habitat within our various classification. Packages, bins.
15:28:40 Like the geo form of the water column substrate and Bye. And so
15:28:48 You know, so you can take the approach of like, okay, well, you
know, like our ultimate endeavor is to sort of like figure out what every
species habitat is and so Cmex kind of gives you the tools to bring
together those environmental variables into a single description.
15:29:02 That is particular to each species. So I don't think that, yeah.
15:29:04 Sounds like a ontology to me.
15:29:07 Right, so.
15:29:13 And, and, and.
15:29:13 But so does sweet, I mean, when I'm looking at what Envo has
there, I mean, under habitat, right, that whoever just put that link in
there, right, so and there they have one habitat under.
15:29:27 Cool.
15:29:27 I know so but that's the whole point of what peers trying to do is
flesh that out.
15:29:34 Right.
15:29:33 For the ocean. And they have the concept of ecotones, but
currently all they're ecotones are not ocean related.
15:29:42 So they need to add a whole bunch of ecotones that are ocean
related.
15:29:44 Wait. So yeah, so I think that you know like a That
15:29:50 I mean that would be what we would be doing.
15:29:54 Okay, but so do you wanna say like habitats or ecotones or like I
mean I
15:29:58 No, eco tones are ego tones and ecotones probably have a water
column component, a geoform component, a substrate component antibiotic
component.
15:30:06 Right, okay.
15:30:08 Those may not be the actual names used in. Envo at the moment, but
Anvo has equivalent kinds of terms and we just have to figure out which are
the related equivalent kinds of terms.
15:30:23 And use them.
15:30:27 Yup, yup, yup.
15:30:22 Yeah, because then he also has ecoregions, ecological corridors.
So, you know, I mean, I'm not Yeah, whether so it just I mean that's the
whole cross walking and harmonization process, right?
15:30:42 It's kind of figuring out like what those sort of like
translations are and then where whatever Cmex has to offer would fit into.
15:30:44 Exactly.
15:30:44 And or whether or not it's like worth it to do that.
15:30:47 And I think it's just, I think it's waste more straightforward
than your. Then you're thinking.
15:30:53 Yeah, I'm sure it is but I mean I'm just saying that it just takes
some figuring out right so
15:30:59 But that would be the work we'd be doing.
15:31:00 Yeah. Okay.
15:31:04 And I noticed already a bunch of terms that I know exactly where
they fit.
15:31:08 Right. But okay, so let me just go back to habitat like we are,
yeah, I mean, hmm.
15:31:10 Fern, for example.
15:31:13 We identify certain like well known communities of organisms, but
we, but C. Doesn't.
15:31:21 You know, identifying habitat like, for species and those species
associations happens as when people take CMEs and apply them to their, you
know, in projects where they are actually trying to do that.
15:31:34 And so that information exists probably like in the literature.
That is not something that C. And you know our group controls or anything
like that but yeah.
15:31:44 And we don't have like a registry of. Of anything like that. So.
That might not be a place to where SAMEX would plug in.
15:31:54 Yeah.
15:31:55 It looks like that Envo habitat, class.
15:31:58 Yeah. But I think we, we understand the point that Envo is has the
habitat, but it's very deficient in the subclasses.
15:32:08 And unlike sweet, you could plug in a whole bunch of habitats
underneath the existing class. In.
15:32:13 Right. So what I'm saying is, is if the habitat approach that
seems to be what they're taking here where you're identifying a habitat for
a specific, I don't know if that's like a genus or.
15:32:26 From off, you know, if they want to associate a habitat for a
specific genus or family or something like that or a community of organisms
right then CMX doesn't really have that.
15:32:36 So that's not going to be where CMEX fits in. Yeah, okay. I was
just trying to answer that question.
15:32:41 Yeah.
15:32:39 That's fine. That's like not a problem.
15:32:44 Okay.
15:32:45 And you have to take an example. I think you mentioned, to column,
you measurements on, you know, that exists again in Envo as an example as a
body of water.
15:32:57 That's pretty. Loose there, you can probably add a lot of lot more
to understanding that because the things you want to say about what we know
about a water column in terms of observation.
15:33:05 Yeah, I mean, I, yeah, we definitely need to go through and check
all these and compare them, right?
15:33:09 Yeah.
15:33:09 I mean, as we said, that is the process that I think that we just
kind of like need to kind of figure out like.
15:33:18 So I look at Hyder form.
15:33:14 What the process for doing this is going to be. Yeah, I can't
really see any of that without knowing, you know, how.
15:33:23 Yeah.
15:33:22 And I already know the answer for Hydroform ICE and all of its
children.
15:33:28 I know where those go.
15:33:30 Yeah.
15:33:35 So, you know, it's pretty straightforward to me.
15:33:38 Okay.
15:33:35 Okay. Right, so, but then, but now what? I mean, you know, I
understand like, you know, the definitions and the terms and all that and
you know, we've gone through like a lot of these comparisons already with
Brandon, right?
15:33:50 But so, I mean, so that we don't just
15:33:53 I guess what I'm saying is I know how to write the SSOM file for
everything under Hyde Reform ICE.
15:34:01 Okay, and so if that's what we need then
15:34:04 Well, that's what we're talking about is. Adding extra terms to.
And though where they do not exist and should.
15:34:17 And mapping terms. To CMAX. Where there are existing terms and
they're needs to be a mapping because the hierarchies are different.
15:34:31 Yeah, I understand that all of all of those concepts, but I mean,
how what's the approach that we're going to take to do this, right?
15:34:38 Are we going to work in spreadsheets or is there some other way to
do this? I mean that's those are the answers that I do not have.
15:34:43 Otherwise I'm happy to look at, you know, the terms and the
contents and provide, you know, information or feedback on like does seem
like this or whatever so
15:34:50 Where you have You already have spreadsheets, so I suspect that
the easiest way to start would be to take your bedsheets and add a couple
columns to them.
15:35:02 For you know how where are they gonna go into into. In the.
15:35:09 Well, you know, Brandon's already done some work on and was saying
perhaps he could, you know, have scripts that he could run to sort of like
help to filter out what those.
15:35:14 Thank you. Well, that's for sweet, for that's that's for sweet.
15:35:18 Yeah, so would it be so this is you know my question we started
out this whole call with was just like, you know, my question we started
out this whole call with was just like, you know, my question we started
out this whole call with was just like, okay, what's the process going to
be?
15:35:32 How is it just like, okay, what's the process going to be? How is
Sweet linking up with Envo?
15:35:35 Is it easier to go from CMX to Sweet to Envo, is it easier to go
from CMEX to Sweet to Envo, or do we just go from CM on a in a separate
kind of parallel process with Cmex to suite.
15:35:41 You know, back and forth. So I guess, and I don't know enough
about like.
15:35:47 Again, what Andre wants, what Sweet wants, who's able to do what,
as to answer that question.
15:35:54 So.
15:36:00 What would you prefer as I guess? I mean
15:36:03 I prefer for like, like either like Brandon and Pierre to say
like, this is what we need.
15:36:10 Because I don't know I can't yeah.
15:36:19 Because I just don't know enough about like, you know, what You
need to end up with in order to make this like useful, this exercise of
comparing.
15:36:30 You know, going through and doing the actual like harmonization of
the the content of the definitions of the comments, right?
15:36:37 So. You know, we can do that like looking at it side by side, but
then how does it actually become useful to in a useful format for Envo and
for suite, where you could then perhaps, you know, run some script and kind
of figure out.
15:36:53 Than where there are further conflicts and where we need to focus
more and and things like that. So.
15:36:59 Do you really feel that there's
15:36:59 Well, the whole point of it. The whole point of Envo is to help
people find data.
15:37:04 So in general, Being able to understand how people have annotated
data is Envo's purpose in life.
15:37:13 So that means that if there annotating data with terms from C.
Then those terms needed
15:37:19 Yeah, but does parent just want that all like a spreadsheet like
in order to like take all this work that we're doing.
15:37:27 Do you just want it to be in the spreadsheet? Is there some other
way that we can do this?
15:37:29 Well, no, no, no, no, no. The
15:37:29 And then, I mean, do we really have to like manually then compare
Sweden.
15:37:39 Yeah.
15:37:33 The end result will be additional terms in Anvo and probably an
SSO M file that maps and votes to C map.
15:37:44 Cmax.
15:37:45 Yeah, but what's the methodology for doing that? Like what is the
word flow?
15:37:48 Whatever's easiest.
15:37:53 Huh.
15:37:47 I think. So I think Kate I think I understand what you're driving
at.
15:37:57 When we did the chryrosphere work, Ruth, you had, you had
developed. As part of a previous exercise.
15:38:04 You had gone through and pulled out or harmonized a bunch of
resources, right? So there were At the ready you had I I'm not sure if they
were spreadsheets or what but you had like a list of resources, right?
15:38:18 I had 27. 27, glossaries that I had harmonized the terms within.
15:38:28 So any given term might have had up to 27 total definitions. And I
had looked at those definitions and said.
15:38:37 Okay, these are all the same. This one over here is different, you
know, that kind of thing.
15:38:44 So we had that as a going in. Standpoint.
15:39:02 Right.
15:38:48 Right. But then when we were doing When we're looking at how those
relate to what's in Envo, it was I mean that's one of the reasons why it
took like 2 years Kate because it was a manual process we went through like
line by line is this term is this term an invo no where does it go and then
we built out the I think at the time it was a robot file and then we
switched
15:39:11 to SSO, M if I remember right, but anyway the point was that was
all in spreadsheets.
15:39:15 Yeah.
15:39:15 Right, the robot file. The robot. Yep.
15:39:15 Right? Here's the list of terms that Ruth has. And then how does
and then we went and we're looking in like bio portal or wherever or in or
in protege and saying oh all right that we don't see anything like that and
it was Pierre you're right it was Pierre and Kai who know info really well.
15:39:34 Right.
15:39:34 So they knew where to look or where maybe the label didn't match
up, but there where a concept should be.
15:39:40 And so to answer your question, it was manual line by line. If you
can take CMX and dump it out into a spreadsheet, which you can do from
protege if you want.
15:39:59 Right.
15:39:49 That would be one way to handle it if you want to try and do some
automated mechanisms to try and build some filters around like text
similarity of definitions for example or You know, like string matching or
whatever of labels to try and whittle it down a bit.
15:40:03 That's one approach, but Yeah, sorry. Did that sort of? Help what
you're driving at?
15:40:10 And I
15:40:10 Yeah, it does. I know, but I mean, but how, but like there's gonna
be, I mean, I know that there are robot templates, right, of how then
perhaps like the sheets should be structured.
15:40:19 But then so, and I do recall, of course, like I work for you guys
a little bit, I think, towards the tail end of.
15:40:26 That info harmonization and I remember like high up here being
there and working on it as well but like Huh, so,
15:40:40 I guess.
15:40:42 Okay.
15:40:40 Yes, you can have spreadsheets. And yes, you can take a
spreadsheet of a hundred terms and then load it into Envo and it'll be fine.
15:40:43 And I even know how to do that.
15:40:43 Okay. That's great. So maybe we'll just start with like as you
said, Ruth, I mean, and I think that, perhaps
15:40:56 That if I just kind of put together like a sheet, if that's
actually sort of like a flat.
15:41:03 List, right?
15:41:07 Other than in the hierarchical order. I don't know. I can put
together a couple of different arrangements of that. So.
15:41:18 Look, I've looked at your CSV spreadsheets while we're doing this
and.
15:41:26 Yeah.
15:41:24 Any of them are fine. You don't need to do anything to them. If
anything, we might end up deleting a few of your columns.
15:41:36 Oh, no big deal.
15:41:36 Yeah, so I mean, I guess what I'm going on is like, do we need to,
what do we just like from the get go start start out with something that
then is consumable by either, you know.
15:41:52 No, we just start off with something we'd like to compare to suite
or anvo.
15:41:50 Their inbo in some kind of way. Or yeah.
15:41:53 Actually let's talk about and vote differently than sweet because
I think the 2 subjects here, one is getting things into suite that are
definitions.
15:41:57 And there's probably not all that many of them that currently
exist. So there would be But getting the ones that.
15:42:05 Match terms in suite. And getting them in I think is is what we
had been working on before and that should just happen.
15:42:16 And ditto, you know, that's That's the process that Brandon's been
working on.
15:42:26 Bye.
15:42:22 So, can I add one little modification to that? It is one thing to
take a definition in, Cmax and look and sort of try to get it into suite.
15:42:34 But I believe it is always useful to look at. What Envo says about
that, how it's structured.
15:42:41 So you don't have to sort of, do it over again. When you're trying
to resolve it with.
15:42:48 Yes.
15:42:46 Well, that's the point. Is that getting and vote definitions into
suite was yet another task.
15:42:54 And. That's the whole suite as a hub of multiple definitions for
the same term so you can look at it and go, oh.
15:43:06 Look at how horrible this is.
15:43:06 Right. I'm just trying to make the point that of the lot of the
definitions that are in Sweden are older from Wikipedia and so forth.
15:43:14 And, Envo tends to be newer and a little bit richer so that we
tended to sort of wanna harmonize a bit more if we had to change anything.
15:43:23 Make taking into account what Envo is thinking.
15:43:26 But that's 2 definitions, one from CMX and one. From Envo or the
same term.
15:43:36 And that's the way. Sweet is headed at the moment as a hub for
multiple definitions.
15:43:41 At least unless Brandon.
15:43:49 Fine, but that has nothing.
15:43:41 In in Envo, it might be that there would be a synonym. in, or an
alternate definition, the question is whether we would Upgrade and, to to
reflect with C.
15:44:00 Mix has or is there some reason to keep what Envo has? Those are
decisions have to be made along the way.
15:44:10 That is the harmonization process. I'm sorry, Ruth.
15:44:04 Those are ones that need be made on a term by term basis looking
at. A term. And this That's right.
15:44:15 And the other thing to say about that is that we often develop a
pattern of thinking that we can apply over time to similar things.
15:44:25 Yep, and that would probably be true here and we don't know our
priori what those patterns might be.
15:44:39 True.
15:44:42 In other words, until we get started, we aren't going to be able
to do any of this.
15:44:45 Yeah.
15:44:45 Fancy magic automation that I think Kate you're looking for
because it ain't going to be that.
15:44:57 And I'm, I'm.
15:44:57 I mean
15:44:50 Yeah, I'm totally looking for fancy. If I could even say it.
Exactly. Here's that. That's fine.
15:44:57 Current automation will take you so far.
15:45:01 We'll just work for the spreadsheets. Yeah.
15:45:02 I can pump everything through Chat GPT if you want. Sorry.
15:45:04 Okay.
15:45:04 Yeah. That's the current automation, automation available.
15:45:09 Yeah.
15:45:11 Yeah, and that's called you better check every line that comes out
15:45:16 And now for our latest hallucination in the ontology. Here we are.
15:45:20 Exactly.
15:45:22 I think there's probably ways that you could check that pretty
easily. So I don't know.
15:45:29 Huh.
15:45:27 But I could be wrong. Yeah, I probably have. I have no idea what
I'm talking about.
15:45:34 Okay.
15:45:35 I actually have done a little work in this space and let's face it
if you don't already have an ontology feeding into this stuff.
15:45:39 Okay.
15:45:43 Where? Helloucinations are the result.
15:45:44 Yeah. Yeah.
15:45:49 And ontologies need to be made by people who actually have the
ability to think.
15:45:55 Yeah.
15:46:00 Okay, so here's what I'm gonna do, I'm gonna work on.
15:46:06 Seriously, your spreadsheets are.
15:46:06 Of course, he likes like a clean and I'll just make sure that you
know I can get you guys the one that has all of the definitions pulled out
and it'll probably have a bunch of stuff that we're not interested in but
we can delete comment columns.
15:46:21 As needed.
15:46:23 Yep, exactly.
15:46:26 So.
15:46:26 And I suggest we just start on the ice ones because I looked at
them on and I know exactly where they go.
15:46:33 Yep.
15:46:37 So can I, I just ask a question here. About. Like the
receipturally. So I mentioned ODK earlier.
15:46:49 I love ODK, by the way.
15:46:48 The ontology development kit. Cause they have plugins for SSM and
robot and a whole bunch of other things.
15:46:56 And, and actually now that I think now that I'm saying it, perhaps
that's something to ask Pierre about, he might have more info, but I'm
wondering if it's worth investing the time seeing how that might fit in.
15:47:07 Now, or apply now. Versus later on.
15:47:12 Put it this way. Personally, what I would be doing if I got The
spreadsheet from Kate is aside from deleting columns.
15:47:22 I would add some columns and in the header. Would be putting in
the robot template terms.
15:47:32 Yes.
15:47:28 So such that those terms could go straight into Because we did
that at the end. For the cryosphere.
15:47:38 Yeah.
15:47:38 As we had spreadsheets. And it's pretty damn straightforward. And
I love the tooling that the Oval Foundry has.
15:47:49 Yeah.
15:47:49 I love the Obo toolkit. The ontology development kit. I've used it.
15:47:53 I love robot. I don't know everything as well as A real ontology
expert. But on the other hand, it all seems Pretty straightforward to me.
15:48:08 I would definitely be interested in learning that. As part of this
process.
15:48:15 That's
15:48:14 Cool. You and I can work on and here's what you have to say to
make this be a new term in Envo.
15:48:24 And here are its axioms.
15:48:27 Okay.
15:48:30 Because that's exactly what we did.
15:48:35 Sounds good.
15:48:35 So we even have examples. I guess what I'm saying. That we can
copy.
15:48:41 Yay!
15:48:49 I mean to be fair that's what I'm using for the definition stuff.
15:48:53 I'm not at all surprised like why would you invent reinvent the
wheel? Why? Why would you do that?
15:48:55 I'm just. No, I, the, the, not the concern. One of the hiccups is
that because suites modular so there's like 247 files, right?
15:49:06 Yep.
15:49:08 And so that's the bit that I've been trying to script is to build
the shell script to run.
15:49:11 Automatically build it it doesn't matter sorry this is a
digression anyway yeah I'm using it for for the definitions work and that's
that was the point.
15:49:33 So do we have a plan?
15:49:34 Okay, ready break
15:49:36 Yeah. So what do we decide to read about this again? I'm actually.
Out next week.
15:49:47 Okay.
15:49:45 But it looks like it's in March. It would be the third week of
March when the suite.
15:49:52 Meeting normally takes place, I think, to allow Brandon and
hopefully Pier to attend.
15:50:02 Yeah, so how are we gonna tell Pierre that we're doing this?
Because he probably needs to know before then.
15:50:10 Absolutely. So we can do a follow up. Email to him. When I get
the, text Cause we recording this, I have the full text.
15:50:20 I will email it out to the group. He's on that and maybe call out
him to special attention that we.
15:50:27 Would love to have him and his expertise and maybe Kai on the
envelope moving forward to what this
15:50:34 Yeah, Kai is not gonna work on this.
15:50:36 Yeah, I know. He's, he said he doesn't mind being on emails, but
he's not, he's just monitoring things rather than.
15:50:43 He has a real job.
15:50:43 Right. Yes. Not related to this.
15:50:49 I have a question. About the actual the next sweet working meeting
is next week. Would anybody be opposed if I move it back 24 h?
15:51:07 Oh does it?
15:50:57 That's that conflicts with the other ESIP meeting. You might not
have been on. Earlier when Megan was talking about The summary session,
Carolina knows more about this summer recession from the prior January
conference.
15:51:13 That's that's the conflict. So a lot of us won't be available.
15:51:15 Oh, yeah, do would it be our own? So, all right, I'll send out an
email about moving it because I'd like, I would like to go over the
definition stuff.
15:51:26 You could make it later in the day. It doesn't conflict maybe and
see who can come.
15:51:32 Yeah, well, Kate and Ruth are the ones that you and I are usually
the ones that attend.
15:51:36 That's why I thought I'd sorry I'm hijacking now. Would you guys
be able to make it if it was later if anybody else wants to attend it's
wonderful
15:51:44 I can make it later in the day.
15:51:47 Alright, I'll ask Megan to just push it back to after the
15:51:44 I Yeah, I'm at a conference all next week, but I may or may not be
able to make it.
15:51:55 I don't know. I would just have to, I need to go through and look
at my schedule for that.
15:52:00 Not that, that's fine. I'll move it back and then, and then if we
have a chance to chat, sweet and if We'll do it another time.
15:52:08 Okay. Sounds good.
15:52:11 Sorry to hijack the meeting here.
15:52:18 I think it's, I think this is what we wanted to talk about anyway,
so I'm glad that you joined.
15:52:23 Dido.
15:52:25 Sticking on my own behalf, that's all. But.
15:52:30 Alright, so that's the plan. The one in March, we're gonna have a
meeting.
15:52:36 Yeah.
15:52:33 Sorry, the meeting will be moved. And and might have some material
at that point.
15:52:41 Just sort of review and look over.
15:52:43 Yes.
15:52:45 Okay.
15:52:47 I'll commit to that.
15:52:47 You sounds like both you, Brandon, and Kate. Will be generating
some additional material and hopefully Pier will be able to be here to be
able to comment on that.
15:52:59 Okay.
15:52:59 Do you think a whole process and, how it relates to
15:53:04 Okay.
15:53:08 Carolina, did you have anything you wanted to add to this? I don't
know how relevant this was for you, but.
15:53:14 Okay.
15:53:15 Yeah, no, I'm just learning. I'm just picking it up and kind of,
I'm.
15:53:20 Yeah.
15:53:20 Just trying to understand. But I guess, Gary, this is, this can be
offline or maybe if you want to hang out for a minute.
15:53:29 I just wanted to. Check in with you again about the. The that you
said what is it called the Meeting highlights webinar.
15:53:36 Right. Yeah.
15:53:39 Yeah, but just If you if you could hang out for a minute, you
don't and after you start recording or whatever.
15:53:42 Okay. A few minutes, I can available, yes. It's Valentine's Day
after all.
15:53:46 Okay. Yeah. Happy Valentine's Day.
15:53:50 Okay. Thank you.
15:53:51 I had my valetine coming down the stairs too soon, so.
15:53:54 Okay, I won't, yeah, I'll be quick. It'll be quick.
15:54:03 Yeah.
15:54:03 Yeah.
15:54:04 Thanks everyone. Whoops. Thanks everyone. See you later.
15:53:58 Okay, so. I guess everybody else is excused. Yeah. Okay, thank
you, everybody.
15:54:07 Thanks, bye.


On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 10:30 AM Gary Berg-Cross <gbergcross at gmail.com>
wrote:

> All,
> Below is info for this upcoming Wednesday's  2 hour session.
> We have decided to have only 1 two hour meeting per month to work on
> projects.
> We will have 2 topics to discuss at this month's meeting..
> One is some discussion of follow ups to the January conference and our 3
> sessions.
> At last week's Marine Data Cluster we had some of this follow up
> including a Feb. 29th meeting to provide  more hands on training of how
> to handle ocean data.
>
> The other is to start harmonizing CMECS with ENVO and SWEET.   Kate will
> have some ideas on core items to consider.
>
>
> Meeting ID853 4485 3594
>  Invite Link
> https://esipfed-org.zoom.us/j/85344853594?pwd=cENuRUY1QW4wTDk2Z212K3cxSUVUQT09
>
> https://esipfed-org.zoom.us/j/85344853594?pwd=cENuRUY1QW4wTDk2Z212K3cxSUVUQT09
>
> Gary Berg-Cross
> Potomac, MD
> 240-426-0770
>
>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-semanticharmonization/attachments/20240215/efe9d733/attachment-0001.htm>