Conmergence

Semantic MediaWiki Camp 2009

http://bit.ly/SMWCamp09

November 7--8 2009 (this weekend), Karlsruhe, Germany

The programme includes various introductory talks and numerous exciting demos and experience reports around SMW:

http://smwforum.ontoprise.com/smwforum/index.php/SMW_Camp_09_-_Schedule

Further demos/break-out sessions can be planned during the event. Or you can just add your own demo to the bottom of the programme page. We will also have quite some discussions about the next steps of SMW and its extensions.

See you in Karlsruhe!

Cheers,

Markus Krötzsch
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute AIFB
Englerstraße 11 (Geb. 11.40), 76131 Karlsruhe,  Germany

phone: +49 (0)721 608 7362
fax:   +49 721 608 6580
email: markus.kroetzsch@kit.edu
web:   http://korrekt.org

http://semantic-web-book.org
http://semantic-mediawiki.org

KIT - Universität des Landes Baden-Württemberg und nationales
Großforschungszentrum in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft

Ontology Summit 2010: Creating the Ontologists of the Future

*alphanumerics in parens are purplenumbers

5th in the series of a 3-month annual event by and for the Ontology Community. This Summit is co-organized by Ontolog, NIST, NCOR, NCBO, IAOA, ... (more, coming!)    (22PR)*

What's New:    (22PS)

Preliminary organization work is now on-the-way - see: /GettingOrganized    (22PT)

The 2010 NIST Interoperability Week is going to be on the week of 15-Mar-2010    (22PU)

Our 2-day OntologySummit2010_Symposium has now been scheduled for March 15 & 16, 2010 (Monday and Tuesday), and, like the previous years, it will be held at the NIST campus at Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA.    (22PV)

Objective:    (22PW)

Theme: "Creating the Ontologists of the Future"    (22US)

Description, Goals & Objectives:    (22PZ)

(draft) Increasingly, major national and international projects centered on ontology technology are being advanced by governments and by scientific and industrial organizations. This brings a growing need for ontology expertise and thus for new methods and institutions for the training of ontologists. The 2010 Ontology Summit will explore strategies to address this need in terms of curriculum, establishment of new career tracks, role of ontology support organizations and funding agencies, as well as training in the analysis and comparison of methodologies for designing, maintaining, implementing, testing and applying ontologies and associated tools and resources.    (22UT)

Process & Deliverables    (22V3)

Similar to our last 4 summits, this Ontology Summit will comprise of 3 months of virtual discourse (over our archived mailing lists) and virtual panel sessions (over augmented conference calls), and will culminate in a 2-day face-to-face workshop/symposium to be held on Mon & Tue, 15 & 16-March-2010 at NIST (Gaithersburg, Maryland, US) during which we will, among other things, distill our thoughts into a collaboratively developed Communiqué (and possibly even a range of follow-up projects and action items.)    (22V4)

The Team    (22PX)

Organizing Committee:    (22PY)

BarrySmith    (22UU)

FabianNeuhaus    (22UV)

LeoObrst    (22UW)

MarkCarlisle    (22UX)

MarkMusen    (22UY)

NicolaGuarino    (22UZ)

PeterYim    (22V0)

SimonFrechette    (22V1)

SteveRay    (22V2)

... (more, coming!) 

1st Call for Papers 4th Int. Workshop on Modular Ontologies (WoMO) Toronto, Canada, May 11, 2010

co-located with FOIS, KR, AAMAS, ICAPS, NMR, and DL

MODULARITY, as studied for many years in software engineering, allows mechanisms for easy and flexible reuse, generalization, structuring, maintenance, design patterns, and comprehension. Applied to ontology engineering, modularity is central not only to reduce the complexity of understanding ontologies, but also to facilitate ontology maintenance and ontology reasoning.

Recent research on ontology modularity shows substantial progress in foundations of modularity, techniques of modularization and modular development, distributed reasoning and empirical evaluation. These results provide a foundation for further research and development.

The workshop follows a series of successful events that have been an excellent venue for practitioners and researchers to discuss latest work and current problems, and is this time organised as a satellite workshop of FOIS 2010, as well as being co-located with several other relevant events, namely KR, AAMAS, ICAPS, NMR, and DL.

TOPICS include, but are not limited to:

• What is Modularity: Kinds of modules and their properties; modules vs. contexts; design patterns; granularity of representation
• Logical/Foundational Studies: Conservativity; modular ontology languages (e.g., DDL, E-Connections, P-DL); reconciling inconsistencies across modules; formal structuring of modules; heterogeneity
• Algorithmic Approaches: distributed reasoning; modularization and module extraction; (selective) sharing and re-using, linking and importing; hiding and privacy; evaluation of modularization approaches; complexity of reasoning; reasoners or implemented systems
• Applications: Semantic Web; Life Sciences; Bio-Ontologies; Natural Language Processing; ontologies of space and time; Ambient Intelligence; collaborative ontology development; etc.

IMPORTANT DATES

Paper Submission: January 29, 2010

Notification:  March 1, 2010

Camera ready: March 11, 2010

Workshop day: May 11, 2010

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES:

The workshop welcomes submission of high quality original and previously unpublished papers.

Contributions should not exceed 13 pages in length and must be formatted according to IOS Press style ( see http://www.iospress.nl/authco/instruction_crc.html ).

Contributions should be prepared in PDF format and submitted not later than January 29 2010 through the EasyChair Submission System ( see http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~okutz/womo4 ).

Submitted papers will be peer-reviewed by members of the program committee. Accepted papers may be extended up to 16 pages and will be published as chapters in an IOS Press book in the series 'Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications'.

The authors of accepted papers are also welcome to submit substantially extended versions to a planned special issue on 'Modularity in Ontologies' of the international journal 'Applied Ontology' (IOS Press).

WORKSHOP CO-CHAIRS:

Oliver Kutz (Research Center on Spatial Cognition (SFB/TR 8), Bremen, Germany) Joana Hois (Research Center on Spatial Cognition (SFB/TR 8), Bremen, Germany) Jie Bao (Tetherless World Constellation & Department of Computer Science, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, USA) Bernardo Cuenca Grau (University of Oxford, UK)

PROGRAM COMMITTEE

Mathieu d'Aquin (Knowledge Media Institute, Open University of Milton Keynes, UK) Alex Borgida (Department of Computer Science, Rutgers University, USA) Stefano Borgo (Laboratory for Applied Ontology, CNR, Trento, Italy) Martin Dzbor (Knowledge Media Institute, Open University of Milton Keynes, UK) Fred Freitas (Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Caixa Postal, Brazil) Silvio Ghilardi (Department of Computer Science, University of Milan, Italy) John Goodwin (Ordnance Survey, Southampton, UK) Peter Haase (fluid Operations GmbH, Germany) Heinrich Herre (Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, University of Leipzig, Germany) Pascal Hitzler (Kno.e.sis Center, Wright State University, USA) Vasant Honovar (Artificial Intelligence Research Laboratory, Iowa State University, USA) Roman Kontchakov (School of Computer Science and Information Systems, Birkbeck College, London, UK) Carsten Lutz (Department of Computer Science, University of Bremen, Germany) Till Mossakowski (German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence, Lab Bremen, Germany) Alan Rector (University of Manchester, UK) Anne Schlicht (KR & KM Research Group, University of Mannheim, Germany) Thomas Schneider (Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester, UK) Luciano Serafini (Centro Per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica, Trento, Italy) Stefano Spaccapietra (School of Computer and Communication Sciences, Lausanne, Switzerland) Heiner Stuckenschmidt (KR & KM Research Group, University of Mannheim, Germany) Andrei Tamilin (Fondazione Bruno Kessler - IRST, Italy) Dirk Walther (Department of Computer Science, Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, Spain) Frank Wolter (Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, UK) Michael Zakharyaschev (School of Computer Science and Information Systems, Birkbeck College, London, UK) Antoine Zimmermann (DERI, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland)

1st eHealth Day, November 11, 2009, Munich

This year a special eHealth Day will be held on 11 November as part of W-JAX 09, the leading conference for Java, Enterprise Architecture and SOA, that takes place in Munich from 09-13th November.

The eHealth Day will have sessions dealing exclusively with Java technologies, architecture and solutions for the healthcare market. eHealth experts from companies like Abraxas Informatik AG, achelos GmbH, and Ocean Informatics as well as ICW AG will take you inside their innovative eHealth solutions. Discover how these leading eHealth specialists are already implementing groundbreaking solutions for the eHealth sector. Learn about the challenges involved and the tools that are available to master them.

Sessions include:

Modular architecture to support reuse and integration 

IPF, open source platform for networking of healthcare information systems 

Using Authorization and Encryption to protect Medical Data 

openEHR and how it supports semantic interoperability in healthcare 

Electronic cost of care reimbursement platform in Switzerland 

Electronic health card - Example use cases

Full agenda and session descriptions for eHealth Day and Conference.

Register now and save 30% off on official registration prices for ICW partners.

If you have colleagues who are interested in attending, please feel free to forward this invitation to them.

Best regards,

Thomas Liebscher

IFIP 6th International Conference on Intelligent Information Processing, October 13-16, 2010, Manchester, UK

The Intelligent Information Processing conference series provides a forum for engineers and scientists in academia, university and industry to present their latest research findings in any aspects of intelligent information processing. This time, we especially encourage papers on knowledge discovery, intelligent Web, intelligent agents, machine learning, autonomic reasoning, intelligence science etc. We also welcome papers that highlight successful modern applications of IIP, such as biomedicine, e-Services, e-Learning, business intelligence. IIP2010 attempts to meet the needs of a large and diverse community. Topics of IIP2010 include, but are not limited to:

Autonomic computing

Automatic reasoning

Automatic translation

Bayesian networks

Belief revision

Bioinformatics

Biomedicine

Business intelligence

Cognitive Modeling

Computational intelligence

Computer vision

Constraint programming

Data Mining

E-learning

E-services

Evolutionary computation

Fuzzy and rough set

Games & Serious games

Image processing

Information retrieval

Intelligence science

Intelligent agents

Intelligence Web

Knowledge acquisition

Knowledge-based systems

Knowledge discovery

Knowledge engineering and management

Knowledge grid

Knowledge representation

Logics and logic programming

Machine learning

Machine translation

Mobile agents

Natural language processing

Neural computing

Ontology engineering

Reinforcement learning

Speech understanding and interaction

Text analysis and text understanding

Web mining

Very large knowledge processing

Workshop, Tutorial and Panel Proposals

The conference Program Committee invites proposals for workshops, tutorial and panel. Proposals should be received by one of the program chairs no later than February 1, 2010.

Submission

Papers should be no longer than 10 pages including all tables, figures, and references but excluding a cover page. Fonts should be in 10-12 pt. 

Each submission must include one cover page which should contain:

Title of the paper with an abstract of no more than 500 words;

A few keywords, from the list above where possible, giving a clear indication of topics;

Author names with affiliations, complete postal addresses, and phone numbers;

Email address of the contact author.

The proceedings will be published by the Springer. Please click here to get the detailed paper format. All papers should be sent electronically (preferably in PDF) to the Easychair paper management system http://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=iip2010 or through the IIP2010 Website (http://www.intsci.ac.cn/iip2010/ ).

IMPORTANT DATES

Submission Deadline 1 April, 2010

Author Notification 1 May, 2010

Camera-ready Due 1 June, 2010

For general information, please contact:

Sunil Vadera
School of Computing
Science and Engineering
University of Salford
Greater Manchester, Salford M5 4WT, UK
S.Vadera@salford.ac.uk

For paper submission, please contact:

Wenjia Niu
Institute of Computing Technology
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Beijing 100190, China
Tel (86) 10-82610254
Fax(86) 10-82610254
E-mail: iip2010@ics.ict.ac.cn
niuwenjia@ics.ict.ac.cn

5th International Digital Curation Conference "Moving to Multi-Scale Science: Managing Complexity and Diversity" Call for Papers

We invite submission of full papers, posters, workshops and demos and welcome contributions and participation from individuals, organisations and institutions across all disciplines and domains that are engaged in the creation, use and management of digital data, especially those involved in the challenge of curating data for e-science and e-research.

Proposals will be considered for short (up to 6 pages) or long (up to 12 pages) papers and also for demonstrations, workshops and posters. The full text of papers will be peer-reviewed; abstracts for all posters, workshops and demos will be reviewed by the co-chairs. Final copy of accepted contributions will be made available to conference delegates, and papers will be published in our International Journal of Digital Curation. Accordingly, we recommend that you download our template and read the advice on its use.

Papers should be original and innovative, probably analytical in approach, and should present or reference significant evidence (whether experimental, observational or textual) to support their conclusions.

Subject matter could be policy, strategic, operational, experimental, infrastructural, tool-based, and so on, in nature, but the key elements are originality and evidence. Layout and structure should be appropriate for the disciplinary area. Papers should not have been published in their current or a very similar form before, other than as a pre-print in a repository.

We seek papers that respond to the main themes of the conference: multi-scale, multi-discipline, multi-skill and multi-sector, and that relate to the creation, curation, management and re-use of research data. Research data should be interpreted broadly to include the digital subjects of all types of research and scholarship (including Arts and Humanities, and all the Sciences). Papers may cover:

• Curation practice and data management at the extremes of scale (e.g. interactions between small science and big science, or extremes of object size, numbers of objects, rates of deposit and use)
• Challenging content: (e.g. addressing issues of data complexity, diversity and granularity)
• Curation and e-research, including contextual, provenance, authenticity and other metadata for curation (e.g. automated systems for acquiring such metadata)
• Research data infrastructures, including data repositories and services
• Disciplinary and inter-disciplinary curation challenges and data management approaches, standards and norms
• Promoting, enabling, demonstrating and characterizing the re-use of data
• Semantically rich documents (e.g. the “well-supported article”)
• The human infrastructure for curation (e.g. skills, careers, training and organisational support structures, careers, skills, training and curriculum)
• Curation across academia, government, commerce and industry
• Legal and policy issues; Creative Commons, special licences, the public domain and other approaches for re-use, and questions of privacy, consent, and embargo
• Sustainability and economics: understanding business and financial models; balancing costs, benefits and value of digital curation

Important Dates

• Submission of papers for peer-review: 24 July 2009
• Submission of abstracts posters/demos/workshops: 24 July 2009
• Notification of authors of papers: 18 September 2009
• Notification of authors of posters/demos/workshops: 2 October 2009
• Final papers deadline: 13 November 2009
• Final posters deadline: 13 November 2009

Special Issue of the Journal of Web Semantics - Bridging the Gap - Call for Papers

Data Mining and Social Network Analysis for integrating Semantic Web and Web 2.0

Abstract submission: 21 September 2009
Submission deadline: 1 October 2009
Reviews due: 1 December 2009
Notification: 15 December 2009
Final version submitted: 15 January 2010
Publication: April 2010

Focus of the Special Issue

The last years have seen increasing collaboration of researchers from the Semantic Web, Web 2.0, social network analysis and machine learning communities. Applications that use these research results are achieving economic success. Data now become available that allow researchers to analyze the use, acceptance and evolution of their ideas.

Highly popular user-centered applications such as Blogs, social tagging systems, and Wikis have come to be known as "Web 2.0". A major reason for their immediate success is the high ease of use of new Web 2.0 services. These sites do not only provide data but also generate an abundance of weakly structured metadata. A good example is tagging. Here, users add keywords from an uncontrolled vocabulary, called tags, to a resource. Such metadata are easy to produce, but lack any kind of formal grounding, as used in the Semantic Web.

The Semantic Web can complement the bottom-up effort of the Web 2.0 community in a top-down manner. Its central point is a stronger knowledge representation based on some kind of ontology with a fixed vocabulary and typed relations. Such a structure is typically something users have in mind when they provide their information in Web 2.0 systems. However, for further use, this structure is hidden in the data and needs to be extracted. Techniques to analyze network structures or weak knowledge representations as can be found in the Web 2.0 have a long tradition in different other disciplines, like social network analysis, machine learning and data mining. These kinds of automatic mechanisms are necessary to extract the hidden information and to reveal the structure in a way that the end user can benefit from it. Using established methods to represent knowledge gained from unstructured data will also be beneficial for the Web 2.0 in that it provides Web 2.0 users with enhanced Semantic Web features to structure their data.

For this special issue, we invite contributions which show how synergies between Semantic Web and Web 2.0 techniques can be successfully used. Since both communities work on network-like data structures, analysis methods from different fields of research could form a link between those communities. Techniques can be - but are not limited to - social network analysis, graph analysis, machine learning and data mining methods.

Topics of interest for this special issue include, but are not limited to:

• ontology learning from Web 2.0 data
• instance extraction from Web 2.0 systems
• analysis of Blogs
• discovering social structures and communities
• predicting trends and user behaviour
• analysis of dynamic networks
• using content of the Web for modelling
• discovering misuse and fraud
• network analysis of social resource sharing systems
• analysis of folksonomies and other Web 2.0 data structures
• analysis of Web 2.0 applications and their data
• deriving profiles from usage
• personalized delivery of news and journals
• Semantic Web personalization
• Semantic Web technologies for recommender systems
• ubiquitous data mining in Web (2.0) environment
• applications

In accordance with the focus of the journal, the relatedness of your submission to the Semantic Web will be an important evaluation criterion.

Submission Details

Submissions should describe original contributions and should not have been published or submitted elsewhere. Submissions based on conference papers should be extended and include a reference to the
corresponding proceedings. All submissions will be reviewed by at least two reviewers. Final decisions on accepted papers will be approved by an editor in chief.

Manuscripts should be prepared for publication in accordance with instructions given in the Guide for Authors.

The submission and review process will be carried out using Elsevier's Web-based EES system.

Guest Editors

* Bettina Berendt, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Bettina.Berendt@cs.kuleuven.be
* Andreas Hotho, University of Würzburg, hotho@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de
* Gerd Stumme, University of Kassel, stumme@cs.uni-kassel.de

Post-graduate fellowship in Semantic Web technologies for Content Management Systems DERI, National University of Ireland, Galway

<ed.note>The IRONY of a research position focusing on ip-based collaboration tools which does not allow remote work IS NOT LOST ON ME. If anyone hears of a position hosted at an institution existing in this century please let me know.</ed.note>

Employment type: Full time

Telecommute: Not allowed

The Reasoning and Querying Unit at the Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI) of the National University of Ireland, Galway invites applications for a Research Assistant, Masters or PhD fellowship position in the area of Semantic Web technologies for Content Management Systems.

DERI, a leading research institute in semantic technologies, offers a stimulating, dynamic and multi-cultural research environment, excellent ties to research-groups worldwide and close collaboration with industrial partners.

The open fellowship is tailored to deploy Semantic Web technologies at large scale in widely used Open Source Content Management Systems and is funded by Science Foundation Ireland. The position offers for the successful candidate an annual stipend, course fees and conference travel when presenting. The DERI Unit for Reasoning and Querying focuses on improving the scalability and investigating the adequacy of traditional reasoning and query answering techniques for the Web, where several classical assumptions no longer hold as data is heterogeneous, distributed, possibly incomplete or contradictory, structured in different levels of granularity, varying in levels of trust and accessible only by following implicit or explicit security policies. Research is performed in collaboration with other DERI units and industrial partners.

Applicants should hold an excellent primary degree in a relevant discipline with industrial project experience, such as active website development with Content Management Systems being a distinct advantage. Applicants should have a strong interest in the area of Linked Data with an understanding of its application and use. Applicants must have a background in concrete CMS systems such as for instance Drupal, Joomla!, Typo3, Plone, etc.; any knowledge about other CMSs is a bonus, programming skills in Java or scripting languages such as PHP, JavaScript is desirable. Applicants must be highly motivated with the ability for independent and critical thought. Successful applicants are expected to combine scientific work with application-oriented research and development in collaborative projects funded by national and European funding agencies.

Please submit your application (including cover letter outlining suitability, a brief outline of your preferred methodology, full CV and contact details for three referees) to hr@deri.org with the subject line 'Post-graduate fellowship in Semantic Web Technologies for Content Management Systems', by 5 pm on Friday, July 10th 2009.

For further information please contact Dr. Axel Polleres at axel.polleres@deri.org or Stéphane Corlosquet at stephane.corlosquet@deri.org

Ontolog Forum Series Transcript: Semantic Wikis: The Wiki Way to the Semantic Web Session 6: The Future of Semantic Wiki: Trends, Challenges and Outlook

PeterYim: Welcome to the SemanticWiki mini-series Session-6 - Thu 5-Mar-2009

* Mini-series Title: Semantic Wikis: The Wiki Way to the Semantic Web
* Session-6 Topic: The Future of Semantic Wiki: Trends, Challenges and Outlook
* Session Chair: Prof. Dr. RudiStuder (FZI & Institut AIFB, Universitt Karlsruhe) & Dr. MarkGreaves (Vulcan)
* Panelists:
 o Chairs of previous sessions in this mini-series to summarize the outcome from their sessions, and to make their short statements on today's topic (5 min. each)
 + Dr. SebastianSchaffert, Mr. HaroldSolbrig, Mr. MaxVoelkel, Mr. MarkusKroetzsch, Mr. MikeDean, Mr. PeterYim, Dr. LiDing & Dr. JieBao
 o Speakers from previous sessions of this mini-series to each deliver short statements regarding the future of semantic wikis as they each see it (2 min. each)
 + Mr. ChristophLange, Mr. DanielHansch, Professor DanielSchwabe, Mr. HaroldSolbrig, Mr. JoelNatividad, Professor KeiCheung, Mr. MarkusKroetzsch, Mr. MikeDean, Professor Dr. PeterDolog, Mr. PeterYim, Dr. SebastianSchaffert, Mr. TobiasKuhn & Mr. YaronKoren

PeterYim: See details on the session page at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2009_03_05

PeterYim: .

anonymous morphed into Daniel Schwabe

anonymous morphed into Daniel Schwabe

Daniel Schwabe: Hi Peter, just checking. I thought the conference would start at 3 (my time), but I just noticed it got pushed back 30m

anonymous morphed into Rudi Studer

Rudi Studer1 morphed into Markus Kroetzsch

anonymous morphed into Son Doan

Rudi Studer: We are having problems dialing in. The German telecon service says that the conference ID is not valid

Peter Dolog: hi all

Markus Kroetzsch: We are now using the UK line to dial in.

anonymous morphed into Yaron Koren

Markus Kroetzsch: Hi Yaron.

Yaron Koren: What's up, Markus.

Markus Kroetzsch: We are still waiting for Peter to dial in ...

Daniel (ontoprise): Hi everybody!

PeterYim: Sorry guys ... I am slightly delayed ... I will be over in a couple of minutes

PeterYim: slides just posted ... please refresh session page

Please change your name from 'anonymous' using the Settings button

anonymous morphed into EdDodds

Lars Ludwig: Hello there

Yaron Koren: Looking through the presentations, it looks like Markus and Max's is an old one.

anonymous morphed into Jesse Wang

Yaron Koren: From the 3rd session.

Sebastian Schaffert: Hi, I dialled in via the German line just fine

Markus Kroetzsch sees two people with their hands up. You can put them down agfain with the hand button at the bottom right, I think.

Markus Kroetzsch: We will try that too, back in a minnute.

Sebastian Schaffert: yes, I could if I had not loggen in again

Sebastian Schaffert: -n+d

Markus Kroetzsch: ok, we are back via the German line

anonymous1 morphed into Christoph Lange

Christoph Lange: hi, sorry for coming a bit late...

Markus Kroetzsch: Hi, we are just starting

anonymous morphed into Tim FInin

anonymous morphed into Mike Lang

Sebastian Schaffert morphed into SebastianSchaffert

SebastianSchaffert morphed into Sebastian Schaffert

anonymous3 morphed into DanielRedmon

Markus Kroetzsch morphed into Markus Krötzsch

Daniel Schwabe: Bullets for those w/o slides should are at http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SemanticWiki/Future

anonymous morphed into JieBao

EdDodds: Thanks to the conveners!!!

anonymous1 morphed into John Pacheco

anonymous2 morphed into Bobbin Teegarden

anonymous morphed into Christoph Lange

Sebastian Schaffert: there is also the 4th SemWiki workshop at ESWC2009

Yaron Koren: I submitted a talk for the SemTech conference, but they never responded, which I guess means that they rejected me.

Yaron Koren:

Markus Krötzsch: You should inquire anyway.

Sebastian Schaffert: ero-training is the goal of every software developer, or should be

Yaron Koren: I did, actually, about a month ago - they didn't respond to that either.

Markus Krötzsch thinks they filter "Yaron" in email headers

Yaron Koren: I knew it!

Yaron Koren: ...or "forms".

EdDodds: Is there a knowledge engineer job posting resource, either on Ontolog or else place?

Tim FInin: we'll continue to need knowledge engineers just as we programmers and database specialists

Sebastian Schaffert: but hard to convince companies that they need one, at least that's my experience

Sebastian Schaffert: thanks Rudi

Markus Krötzsch: There will also be another SMW user meeting, maybe Daniel (ontoprise) can say something on that.

Daniel (ontoprise): Peter, would you be so kind and show my updated slide later? (v1.1)

Mark Greaves: Tim: I agree that we will need KEs in many cases; the question is the degree to which semantic wikis can socialize some of the lower-end schema design applications.

Daniel Schwabe: I don't believe there will be a single "user interface" that is universally "good" for all

Markus Krötzsch: Right, see item 2

Daniel Schwabe: therefore, we really need environments that make it easy to create customized interfaces

Lars Ludwig: we need one environment to customize, maybe

Daniel Schwabe: perhaps some communities may reach a consensus on some interface model that suits them

Markus Krötzsch: Wrongs slide!

Markus Krötzsch notes that slide numbers are not equal to topic numbers

Daniel Schwabe: Why access only from other wiki *systems*, and not from any data source?

Markus Krötzsch: Didn't he say this?

Daniel Schwabe: I heard Rudi say "accessing data from other wiki systems"...

Mark Greaves: DanielS: I agree about the multiple UIs; we don't expect a single best interface to a RDBMS, so why should we expect a single best interface to semantic data? Your M-V-C work is quite cool in this regard.

PeterYim: @DanielHansch: I've got your updated slide online

Markus Krötzsch: ok, we can check on the recording, I was more focussed on the slide

Daniel Schwabe: MarkG - ok, but the actual challenge of good UI design remains

Yaron Koren: No, he talked about other data sources before, including desktop-only data.

Daniel Schwabe: ok, my mistake...

Markus Krötzsch: The slides are here: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/SemanticWiki/SWiki-06_Future-of-SemanticWiki_20090305/SemanticWiki-Future--RudiStuder_20090305.pdf

Yaron Koren: That was early on in the talk.

Daniel Schwabe: yes, there is the URL to all the slides earlier in the transcript

Daniel Schwabe: I think this definition is missing collectively produced content. To me this is one of the defining notions of "wiki"

Yaron Koren: Sure.

Sebastian Schaffert: we had a definition of "Wiki Philosophy" in the first session

Sebastian Schaffert: it included "everyone can edit"

EdDodds: Anyone using twitter here? What hash tags do you use for Ontolog Forum related tweets?

Mark Greaves: DanielS: I think there is enough diversity between SMW+, Knoodl, AceWiki, IkeWiki, SWiM, and the other semantic wikis that our community is not well served by drawing bright inclusion lines or debating terminological scope, even around a fundamental property like collaboration. The marketplace is redefining our term anyway. I'd rather see us be inclusive about the term "semantic wiki", leave it hazily defined, and let our various pieces of software speak for themselves.

Sebastian Schaffert:

Sebastian Schaffert: research has to be fun;.)

Markus Krötzsch: +1 to Mark

Yaron Koren: I would think a definition of semantic wikis that doesn't include collaboration is not a definition at all.

Daniel Schwabe: +1 to Yaron - and that's true for Wikis, not just Semantic Wikis...

Mark Greaves: YaronK: I use a semantic wiki in a noncollaborative way for my own personal information management, for example.

Markus Krötzsch: Actually, my hoempage is a semantic wiki, but I am the only editor

Sebastian Schaffert: BTW, first KiWi open source prerelease: http://www.schaffert.eu/2009/02/27/first-kiwi-open-source-release/ (sorry for advertisement, couldn't resist)

Daniel Schwabe: MarkG - I agree with the overall approach to the problem; I also don't believe in very strong categorizations that serve no purpose.

Yaron Koren: Yes, I'm aware of single-user wikis, but the tools are in place for collaboration.

Markus Krötzsch: Sure

Sebastian Schaffert: not necessarily

Daniel Schwabe: The issue is that if you really take away the collaboration infrastructure, the problem becomes much simpler.

Sebastian Schaffert: it always becomes simpler without cocurrency

Daniel Schwabe: exactly

Sebastian Schaffert: but still, wikis are not about collaboration primarily, they are about creating web content quickly

StephenDavies: (what slide are we on now?)

Mark Greaves: "Database" doesn't have a very tight definition, nor does "word processor" or other common classes of software -- they more have a family resemblence and hazy boundaries. No one has an issue with this. So I'd hope this approach is part of our semantic wiki community as well.

Daniel Schwabe: Hmmm, then wysywig HTML editors would be wiki tools!

StephenDavies: (ah, okay)

Sebastian Schaffert: there is tiddlywiki

Sebastian Schaffert: http://www.tiddlywiki.com/

Yaron Koren: Slide 11 - interestingly, it's about "what is a wiki".

Sebastian Schaffert: a kind of wysiwyg editor if you like

Sebastian Schaffert: but a wysiwyg editor does not create a website, it just creates HTML

Lars Ludwig: take a CMS

Daniel Schwabe: Ok, some CMSs or tools do that - create the page, publish right away. One of the really enabling factors in wikis is easy *linking* (not so much formatting, imho)

Tim FInin: FB and youtube don't seem to be wikis to me.

Sebastian Schaffert: yes, linking is crucial

Sebastian Schaffert: and then there is versioning

Yaron Koren: You can't edit other people's contributions in FB, YouTube, etc.; that's the issue.

Sebastian Schaffert: and (you can debate that) everyone can edit

Daniel Schwabe: So that's why some of the social software sites/tools mentioned in slide 11 would not really count as wikis (from the easy linking pov). And, of course, editing other people's contents, sure.

Tim FInin: more like forums, then

Sebastian Schaffert: yes, but there are nowadays many corporate wiki installations where *not* everyone can edit

Sebastian Schaffert: but still they are wikis

Tim FInin: bossWiki

Daniel Schwabe: it's ok if you have some editorial control on who is allowed to publish...

Daniel Schwabe: functionally speaking, it's still collaborative content AND linking

Harold Solbrig: I think the history component is an important aspect as well.

Sebastian Schaffert: I often summarise the wiki characteristics as follows:

Sebastian Schaffert: - On a wiki, anyone can edit

Sebastian Schaffert: - Wikis are easy to use (buzzword!)

Sebastian Schaffert: - Wiki content is linkable

Sebastian Schaffert: - Wikis support versioning

Sebastian Schaffert: - Wikis support all media (that one is an extension of the old idea of web page)

Sebastian Schaffert: http://www.kiwi-project.eu/index.php/kiwi-vision/21-wiki-philosophy

Lars Ludwig: hm, I could think of a virtual wiki integrating personal statements without direct editing

Christoph Lange: I wouldn't call the feature "versioning" -- IIRC it was originally called "easy undo" = it's easier to undo a mistake than to mess up sth. (and versioning is one solution for that)

Sebastian Schaffert: true

Daniel Schwabe: my definition - easy content and linking; collaborative creation. Versioning is really just a way to overcome lack of concurrency control - leave to the users to undo inconsistent updates, simplifies implementation.

Sebastian Schaffert: @Lars: Twitter?

Sebastian Schaffert: Daniel: versioning is much more important

Sebastian Schaffert: it is about taking away fears

Sebastian Schaffert: the fear of breaking things

Lars Ludwig: why not integrating twitter messages into a wiki

Yaron Koren:

Daniel (ontoprise): The "rule knowledge in SMW"-prototype is online: http://ruledemo.ontoprise.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

Daniel Schwabe: ok, but I consider that as part of "collaborative content creation" support

Sebastian Schaffert: if I know that I can undo my changes in a Wiki, I feel much more easy to actually contribute

Sebastian Schaffert: @Lars: yes, of course (KiWi)

Yaron Koren: I was smiling at the "breaking things", BTW.

EdDodds: Isolated components will be available to link with electronic medical records and financial reporting increasingly done in extensible business reporting language (xbrl) as well. Anyone looking at the medical banking implications of this yet?

Harold Solbrig: The versioning isn't just being able to undo - it carries the evolution of how the idea was formed. Interestingly, discussions should probably be linear - time flows down the page, but core pages need history.

Markus Krötzsch: The "Ask The Wiki" demo is still found at http://semanticweb.org/wiki/Special:ATWSpecialSearch (URL not on my slides)

anonymous1 morphed into John McClure

Peter Dolog: just some thoghts based on above discussion. I think we probably need some kind of a metaphor for semantic wiki. Looking at what the other wrote: Sebastian - quickly update content -> I think this is historically wiki; Daniel: collaborative editing of content was probably added after when CSCW peaple entered, knowledge evolution goes towards semantics a bit (versioning vs. evolution? probably a discussion point too)

EdDodds: >>Lars Ludwig: why not integrating twitter messages into a wiki - Indeed, saw this a.m. http://www.kmworld.com/Articles/News/Breaking-News/Wikis-get-social-52891.aspx on a product (eTouch announces SamePage Version 4.1) that "functionally" attempts this, although not actually with twitter or identi.ca/laconi.ca

Daniel Schwabe: @PeterD - No, collaboration was there since the beginning in Ward Cunninghams first wiki

Peter Dolog: OK, I am not excluding it. I think we just probably miss some kind of methaphor we could all ground too.

Markus Krötzsch: A core aspect of Ward's Wiki was simplicity -- hardly any markup.

Harold Solbrig: As was the original HTML

Lars Ludwig: EdDodds: next step: integrate 'semantic' messages

Peter Dolog: ok, so what would be an equivalent simplicity to semantic wiki

Markus Krötzsch: As Ward said himself, Wikipedia and others have moved away from this part a lot, but I think he is okay with this

Peter Dolog: simplicity in editing beyond content - knowledge?

Daniel Schwabe: I translated these into "easy content creation and linking"

Daniel Schwabe: So I really don't care what is the underlying representation - if I have a tool that makes it very easy to create content, that's fine.

Markus Krötzsch: Ward's wiki was not just "easy" (to use), its whole data model was extremely simple. There was hardly any structure in the data it contained. Mostly links.

LiDing: the notion of easy is hard to say

Daniel Schwabe: Hence, with wysiwyg HTML enable wiki content to be HTML, so long as people don't have to edit the source...

LiDing: even editing with wiki require training

Harold Solbrig: Interesting now that I think about it. HTML 1.0 was more semantic than syntax. The XML community argues that it "got off track" with the images and formatting information rather than the semantics of the message itself. XML, on the other hand, made it *too* easy for everyone to say whatever they said their own way. RDF & OWL etc. are attempts to agree on semantics, but WIKI, in a way, is a return to the original HTML principles.

Mark Greaves: LiD: very well said, "the notion of easy is hard to say"

LiDing: furthermore, editing in English is not that easy

Daniel Schwabe: Besides content itself with the simple markup, the real winner was the simple linking mechanism - reference by name

Markus Krötzsch: but maybe maintaining a basic data model with as little strucutre as possible is not actually our goal these days ...

Daniel Schwabe: at that time, this was the difficult part to achieve in a simple way

Harold Solbrig: Agreed - especially the link to a yet to be created page.

Markus Krötzsch: indeed

John McClure: Core & definitional to wikis -- which seems not to have received alot of attention -- are '''namespaces'''. I believe that public understanding of wikis needs to evolve, not be a revolution with too many concepts. Thus, I suggest that the concept of namespaces -- as a form of strong typing -- is the next crucial atom of info to be communicated.

Daniel Schwabe: @Markus - sure, I would not focus so much on a "data model"

Daniel Schwabe: @johnM - interesting point...

EdDodds: @Lars Ludwig: next step: integrate 'semantic' messages >> yes, I wonder if the open ontology registry (Ontolog Project) might be utilized to connect with tagging a la delicious, folksonomies, twit hash tags, etc. to help give context to these semantic messages...

Peter Dolog: @DanielS: so our ultimate goal is then, what is now difficult on the content in the wikis which semantics can make it simple

Markus Krötzsch: @Daniel: I mean the basic structural model of the wiki content. In spite of all freedom that users should have, technically there must be some basic "model".

Daniel Schwabe: that's part of it. Then there is the "consuming the information" part. No good to be easy to create if it is hard to consume! which leads us to customizable interfaces

Markus Krötzsch: s /Daniel/DanielS/

John McClure: I suggest that IF ontologies are calibrated with (inter)wiki namespaces, THEN ontology metadata can be reasoned, leading to interoperability

Daniel Schwabe: @MarkusK - sure

Markus Krötzsch: we see it!

Yaron Koren: SMW mostly uses categories and not namespaces.

Markus Krötzsch: Well, it uses both but for very different things.

Harold Solbrig: We had to splice namespaces in...

Lars Ludwig: document annotation is no solution

Harold Solbrig: e.g. RDF_type or WINE_cabernet

Markus Krötzsch: @PeterYim: my lightning slide is not linked online -- did you get it?

John McClure: Yaron, yes I agree, but that doesnt distress me. The essential point is that SMW needs to develop an ontology that describes NSs.

Yaron Koren: Markus - a minority of people use namespaces for data. Like Harold.

Markus Krötzsch: Oh, I would not encourage this, from a technical viewpoint

Yaron Koren: Talk to Harold. And John.

John McClure: because...?

Yaron Koren: John - I don't see why usage of namespaces is that important to you.

John McClure: Because it is a '''container'''. Because it's already in MW. Because it is not new

Yaron Koren: You could say the same for categories.

Harold Solbrig: Two different notions of namespace. One is the Mediawiki ns (Category, Template, Property, and talk analogs) and the second is ontology namespace (URI)

Markus Krötzsch: Ah, that is indeed different

Jesse Wang: Yaron: I believe one reason people use namespaces is to avoid name conflict: say, two pages: NS1:MembersList vs NS2:MembersList.

Daniel Schwabe: I already hit *2 on mine

John McClure: Harold, agreed. What is the difference my friend?

Markus Krötzsch: @Harold: Of course, namespaces in ontologies often have no semantic significance. They are specific to some serializations, but not part of the ontological content.

Sebastian Schaffert: and they don't say anything about the ontology

Sebastian Schaffert: they are about the URIs and not suitable for grouping ontologies

Markus Krötzsch: (opening a file in an ontology editor and saving it again may sometimes change the namespaces that are used)

Markus Krötzsch: The notion of "URI" does not involve namespaces either.

Markus Krötzsch: They only come in in XML and some other file formats.

Daniel Schwabe: I guess what is meant is some facility to help "distributed vocabulary management"

LiDing: isn't wiki a place forcing people to converge?

Markus Krötzsch: @DanielS: Yes, the problem is that semantic technology standards are pretty poor on this task.

Daniel Schwabe: @MarkusK - sure, I was just trying to give my interpretation of the remark on using NSs

Markus Krötzsch: yes, and I think it is a valid remark, just hard to implement properly using standards

Daniel Schwabe: @LiDing - yes, but converge != merge

John McClure: What is meant is a hook to define context, the 'frame' through which a particular wiki, or namespace within a wiki, is constructed. Where else to define such context *in the existing framework*?

LiDing: @daniel, right we do forced-converge or merged by mapping

John McClure: Frankly I am most concerned with making swikis palatable as possible
- Start with existing concepts, like namespaces (aka context) and pages (aka resources)

Daniel Schwabe: @LiDing - I believe merged by mapping is more acceptable, hence the use of NSs to help that

John McClure: we can all agree semantically what the 'talk' ns is for. Why stop there?
Am suggesting some additional ''foundational namespaces'' in addition to the
fourteen (14) standard ns's.

Tim FInin morphed into Tim Finin

Daniel Schwabe: Shameless plug - partial answer to point 2 (interface between dbpedia and semantic wiki) - Explorator: http://www.tecweb.inf.puc-rio.br/explorator. First step, exploring data; second step, create/add/edit content (coming)

Yaron Koren: @KeiCheung - well, some might say that a semantic Wikipedia might replace DBPedia entirely.

John McClure: e.g., put one's formal ontology in a 'term' ns, controlled by KEs
Leave folksonomies in the 'category' ns -- potential terms adoptable by KEs

Daniel Schwabe: @yaronK - sorry, I really don't believe that. They serve entirely different purposes. I could see Semantic Wikipedia being based on top of dbpedia...

Sebastian Schaffert: @Yaron: which would make sense, why are they separate in the first place ...

Sebastian Schaffert: well, at the moment, DBPedia is based on Wikipedia

Daniel Schwabe: @YaronK (perhaps that's what you meant?)

Sebastian Schaffert: adding the DBPedia-way of querying data to Wikipedia would make sense

Yaron Koren: No, I'm talking about adding SMW (for instance  ) to Wikipedia.

Yaron Koren: Wikipedia could then be queried directly.

Sebastian Schaffert: same result, isn't it (or even better)

Sebastian Schaffert: that's what I meant

Daniel Schwabe: @sebastian - one of the advantages of dbpedia is having a sparql endpoint. It enables powerful interfaces such as the Explorator I mentioned above

Markus Krötzsch hears echo

Sebastian Schaffert: yes, but Wikipedia could offer the SPARQL endpoint

Daniel Schwabe: In addition, you could always have the (Semantic) Media Wiki interface, as you said

Sebastian Schaffert: instead of having it separate

Sebastian Schaffert: I disagree with Mike - OWL must prove that it is useful or otherwise we dump it

Sebastian Schaffert: (my challenge ...  )

Christoph Lange: one more thought about namespaces: I think they are needed if links should remain easy to author. LinkByName actually requires one flat namespace, wich is not practical for structuring knowledge, but full URIs are hard to author

Daniel Schwabe: +1 to ChristophL

Sebastian Schaffert: @Christoph: link lookup can be done differently

Harold Solbrig: @Markus (wrt namespaces) - indeed, namespaces have no semantic significance, which is why they work out ok as a part of the name itself. The key, however, is disambiguation - especially when you are referencing outside resources that have not coordinated their names. The classic example is the NCI has a class called "Agent", which includes drugs and other delivery mechanisms. NCI_Agent is needed...

Sebastian Schaffert: I'll maybe discuss with you separately how we now do it in KiWi

Markus Krötzsch: I agree with Sebastian, but I don't think OWL is just useful if it is useful in wikis; actually, we would have very advanced swikis indeed if they are able to leverage a technology as powerful as OWL. Maybe we are not there yet.

KeiCheung: Yaron, my chat room page was blocked by other windows so I didn't see your comment. wikipedia started with free text, so it's not a natural fit to semantic web even dbpedia addresses some of the issues. If we start right using semantic mediawiki (instead of mediawiki), we might be able to create a better dbpedia (neurodbpedia in my case).

Yaron Koren: Well, as far as I know DBPedia just uses Wikipedia's infobox data, which could be relatively straightforwardly semantic-ized.

Sebastian Schaffert: ... or create a flop because people are reluctant to use it

Sebastian Schaffert: if it is too complex

Sebastian Schaffert: difficult act of balancing

Markus Krötzsch: @Harold: yes, I agree; I am not sure how well this is supported by current tools, though

Harold Solbrig: @Markus I disagree. OWL, while it may not appear directly, is an important component when defining the intended meaning of the semantic components. With OWL, RDF, ... we have "Category" and "Property". That said, OWL should be under the covers.

Daniel Schwabe: I think we can build special purpose interfaces to create, edit and navigate data for which we KNOW the (meta) schema.

Sebastian Schaffert: people absolutely don't care about semantics

Sebastian Schaffert: they have to be added in a natural way

Sebastian Schaffert: forms are one way

Markus Krötzsch: in addition, people absolutely don't care about wikis

Sebastian Schaffert: tagging might be one

Sebastian Schaffert: exactly

Yaron Koren:

Yaron Koren: So what are we doing here?

KeiCheung: faviki?

Daniel Schwabe: @MarkusK, unless you are saying this "tongue in cheek", people DO care about wikis...

Harold Solbrig: @Markus: We had to roll our own for the time being. Not only do we have the namespace issue, but, one way or another, we have to know that "Wine" and "Wein" map to the same core resource, so we need a notion of identity.

KeiCheung: owl:sameAs?

Sebastian Schaffert: @Yaron: we care about positioning semantic wikis as a tool that people really like to use without noticing that they are using a wiki or semantics

Harold Solbrig: I want to get to the same page in the end.

Sebastian Schaffert: @Harold: this becomes very difficult

Sebastian Schaffert: think of "Snow"

Markus Krötzsch: @Yaron: That is why I think we should step back and consider the goal we have. We gather valuable experience in supporting structured and unstructured content, for trained and untrained users, in groups or alone -- we can define "CMS" or at least contribute significantly to its future definition.

EdDodds: Folks don't care about "semantics" but they do care about "context" -- they just don't realize they can be the same thing

Sebastian Schaffert: in Bavaria, we have about 5-10 notions of snow, in Iceland they have about 15

Daniel Schwabe: Good user interface are crucial to ANY interactive application...

Sebastian Schaffert: and in Saudi Arabia they probably have only 1

Sebastian Schaffert: +1 to Daniel

Sebastian Schaffert: user centred design

Daniel Schwabe: @SebastianS (Ha, in Brazil we have may .5 notion of snow, none real! :-Q)

Markus Krötzsch: @DanielS: The people from the street care about the label "wiki" as they care about "Web 2.0", but the cateogrization as one or the other type of CMS is not essential to them as long as it works

Daniel Schwabe: @MarkusK - ah, ok

Harold Solbrig: @Sebastian: What we've done is created a 3 part identifier (NS_designation(code)). NS is namespace ID, designation is language specific and possibly changeable name and code is immutable. Note that links don't just come from other wiki pages (!). If we don't find NS_designation(code), we look up NS(Code). If found, we build a redirect page.

EdDodds: A simple case is job matching a la hr-xml. HR still refuses to use "context" to match "job description" with "resume" -- job seekers, however, do wish they would

Markus Krötzsch: @Harold: I think I understand what kind of problems you would encounter there. You want to work on syntax, when all SemWeb standards work on semantics (i.e. letting you identify the entities you model, but not the names that you use for them).

Markus Krötzsch wonders how many parallel side chats one can have while still being an attentive listener ...

EdDodds: Another case is the White House Forum on Health Reform Event on now http://www.whitehouse.gov/live2/ where about of the jawing is about differing definitions and cross talk

EdDodds: alot of

John McClure: Special purpose interfaces (@Daniel) could be bound each to a namespace.
People 'get' that pretty easily, and understand that

Sebastian Schaffert: @Harold: but how does it solve the problem of owl:sameAs redirecting to the same page?

John McClure: place:White House is SURELY different than article:White House and talk:White House

Sebastian Schaffert: concepts are slightly different in different cultures

Daniel Schwabe: @JohnM - sure, that's one of the primitive mechanisms we use in HDEWiki (and more general in HyperDE tool)

John McClure: each requiring a wholly different set of tools to make the goal (completing content) faster, better, cheaper

Daniel Schwabe: @JohnM - there is a builtin notion of "context", and a way to customize the interface depending on the context.

Joel Natividad: Following up on my point about word processors - has anybody looked into using the new document formats - Open XML and ODF in particular as a jumping point

Joel Natividad: for capturing semantically annotated data when creating documents

Joel Natividad: ODF has a metadata Technical Comittee

smishra morphed into Sunil Mishra

Sebastian Schaffert: yes, we even have an open bug tracker issue on this

Sebastian Schaffert: still open

Daniel Schwabe: @YaronK, can you post the URL to the website you mentioned?

Yaron Koren: Sure - http://opencongress.org/wiki

anonymous1: How is the UI problem related to the non-specific spirit of the wiki paradigm? For instance, from my experience working within the biomedical domain I have see that tools such as WIKI-Proteins do not facilitate any specific tool for the kind of information they are meant to support. How could having more specific UIs help solving the UI problem?

Bobbin Teegarden: Has anyone tried to move the wiki ui from words and bullets to an interactive graph (with GIS overlay) more like Gelernter's Mirror World?

Sebastian Schaffert: because specific is always better for the user than generic

Markus Krötzsch: anonymous1, you can use "Settings" at the top panel to get a name.

Daniel Schwabe: @anonymous1 - that's precisely the point I was making in my earlier interventions!

Lars Ludwig: name space? -- I call it mind space

Harold Solbrig: @Sebastian: Even with owl:sameAs, we still have to get folks from whatever historical or language specific hyperlink they've got to the SMW page that defines the category or property. The advantage of the identifier approach is we don't have to carry a history of all names that have been used.

Markus Krötzsch: oops, I misinterpreted the text field next to the hand button

Sebastian Schaffert: response:

Sebastian Schaffert: namespaces are not for semantics

Daniel Schwabe: @YaronK - is there some sort of schema underlying the "structured" portion of this website? Is there a way to access the "raw" underlying data?

Sebastian Schaffert: @Harold: that's fine - my concern is only that it is not so easy to use the same concept in multiple languages

Sebastian Schaffert: we had this in IkeWiki

Yaron Koren: @DanielS - not really, no.

Sebastian Schaffert: but didn't to it in KiWi after a long discussion

Sebastian Schaffert: did the conference break? I was kicked out

Sebastian Schaffert: and cannot log in again

Markus Krötzsch: we are still on

anonymous1: I suppose that also has to do with being able to define atomic components of a wiki page, the page is the atomic unit of the wiki.

PeterYim: @Sebastian ... was that for voice or for the chat room?

Harold Solbrig: @Sebastion: agreed that it isn't. There are attempts and claims to be able to do this, however, in Medical "ontologies" such as Gene Ontology and SNOMED-CT. Also, what of Dublin Core and good ol' RDF?

Sebastian Schaffert: @peter: voice, but back again

PeterYim: glad you are able to get back in .. sorry for the mishap

Sebastian Schaffert: @anonymous1: not necessarily, we also discussed heavily in the community how to annotate parts of pages

Sebastian Schaffert: take the Wikipedia page about the computer mouse

Sebastian Schaffert: it would be useful to annotate each section differently, because it is about many historical mice

Joel Natividad: @Tim: Great stuff! Would love to see what your team put together.

Joel Natividad: @Tim: Great stuff! Would love to check out the work that your team did

anonymous1: can u track changes over anything else but pages?

Sebastian Schaffert: @anonymous1: yes, in KiWi we implemented versioning and transactions for metadata

Sebastian Schaffert: not 100% solved, but mostly

Joel Natividad: Actually, I'm currently working on embedding semantic metadata in the SVG XML files that SRF-Ploticus produces.

anonymous1: is there any literature on that?

John McClure: Markus' concern is that an ns organization conflicts with
one's ability to 'categorize' things in multiple ways.
There are several responses to this. First, don't overlook the
impace of REDIRECTS. Second, consider closely whether the structure
of the ontology is ill-fitting wrt the implemented namespaces.

Christoph Lange: @anonymous1: the page can remain the atomic unit, but then we need good refactoring workflows in case a page grows more complex (and subconcepts emerge within a page)

Sebastian Schaffert: on the versioning? we are working on an article

Sebastian Schaffert: should be finished next week

Yaron Koren: Sorry, what was the question? I couldn't hear it.

Markus Krötzsch: @John: My point is: categories already do that, are well known, and have suppor by advnaced UIs even for searching. So why try to use MW namespaces?

Sebastian Schaffert: @John: never forget the user

Sebastian Schaffert: who would find this useful? I would find it awkward

Markus Krötzsch: @John: I agree that it could be conceived, even though it would not play well with the technical use of namespaces now (e.g. namespaces cannot be added from the wiki but only server-side)

Daniel Schwabe: @anonymous1 - there is a whole series of work on model-based interface specification. If you want to get a flavor of what's possible, some is exemplified in our HDEWiki demo: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/SemanticWiki/SWiki-02_Technology-1_20081120/HDEWiki--DanielSchwabe_20081120.html

John McClure: I don't believe there is any ontology for defining a category.
(Unless you wanna raise Topic Maps v Ontology debate)

Sebastian Schaffert: SKOS

Markus Krötzsch: well, I think we are talking of different things here

Joel Natividad: In my ideal world, users will work on their documents using familiar interfaces and then the knowledge is published on Semantic Wiki

Sebastian Schaffert: +1 to Joel

Sebastian Schaffert: intuitiveness means known patterns of use

John McClure: yep, skos.
Further, mw searching does understand ns's and categories.
Certainly I acknowledge that there's a break with categories in some sense.
But this is called 'emerging ke' right

anonymous1: Hi Christoph, how could the re-factoring be done?

Joel Natividad: and other users can further annotate on Wiki, and if it can be done, the annotations are round-tripped down to the document

Daniel Schwabe: +1 to Joel too

Joel Natividad:

Guoqian Jiang: @Markus, We are using RDF output from SMW for processing proposals generated from LexWiki

Peter Dolog: @Joel: And this is exactly also a big challenge for us as researchers

Peter Dolog: i.e. how to make it simpler to make

Jesse Wang: We are doing something at Vulcan.

Peter Dolog: because program we can always

Jesse Wang: Mark is talking on that.

Peter Dolog: but how everybody can do that?

Christoph Lange: @anonymous1: in Wikipedia it is done manually. Whenever a subsection (e.g. history of Italy) grows too large, somebody first puts a warning there (this should be rolled out to an article of its own), then somebody else does that, and replaces the former section by a short summary, and fixes links on other pages pointing to the subtopic

Markus Krötzsch: we are also working on solutions for inter-wiki data exchange and integration -- I would like to collect input on what people need

Christoph Lange: @anonymous1: Now assume semantic structures on pages (e.g. saying this paragraph is a subconcept of type T), then a semantic wiki could assist with that

Tim Finin: gotta go. Thanks for all the fish

John McClure: @Sebastian - Users find it useful that [[place:White House]] involves its own set of tools

Markus Krötzsch: we plan to release software for exchanging data between wikis (instead of copying it from one wiki to the other by duplicating pages); use cases could affect our desing choices

Guoqian Jiang: @Markus, we are really interested in the future plan for RDF/OWL backend of SMW

Markus Krötzsch: well, feel free to write an email

Markus Krötzsch: (I think the session stops rather soon)

Guoqian Jiang: @Markus, yes, talk to you later by email

Sebastian Schaffert: @John: how about the page about the place which is called "White House" involving their own tools instead of placing it on the link?

Markus Krötzsch: ok, just bear with me being slow processing mails; quite some of them these days ...

Guoqian Jiang: OK, I see.

Daniel Schwabe: @MarkusK - why not use LOD as the underlying basis to share content between wikis?

anonymous1: @ Joel: having a semantic structure supporting the generation of documents could make it possible to produce scientific papers, for instance, fully annotated. This could deliver an OLD environment over the paper. I think that when supporting the generation of documents the annotation should happen naturally and without any effort, the document being generated should be immerse in the web by means of relationships over those data types contained in the paper.

Markus Krötzsch thanks Mark and Rudi for chairing this session, and Peter for setting this up

Joel Natividad: plaudits to the all the conveners, Peter in particular!

Sebastian Schaffert: @Daniel: done by KiWi and planned for extension

John McClure: Users find it useful that [[place:*]] is in effect, a geo database
That [[:White House]] is an article ABOUT something (like the [[place:White House]]
that [[place_talk:White House]] is an article ABOUT [[place:White House]], etc etc
Of course, you can see metastatements abound

anonymous1: Thanks everybody

Sebastian Schaffert: yes, thanks!

Guoqian Jiang: Thanks all

Peter Dolog: thanks everybody

Daniel Schwabe: @SebastianS - great, will take a closer look!

Daniel Schwabe: Thanks all!

Christoph Lange thanks the organizers and all participants

Joel Natividad: any news about 2nd User Group Meeting of SMW?

Daniel Schwabe: Bye all, thanks for the interesting exchange!

Markus Krötzsch: bye

Peter Dolog: bye to all

Sebastian Schaffert: @Daniel: essentially, if you access the KiWi system with a client that sends "Accepts: application/rdf" it redirects to http://showcase.kiwi-project.eu/KiWi/linkeddata.seam?http://showcase.kiwi-project.eu/KiWi/content/FrontPage

PeterYim: Great session ... Mark, Rudi and everyone! Thank you all for a most wonderful mini-series!

Sebastian Schaffert: or something similar

Yaron Koren: @Joel - I guess there's no news.

Joel Natividad:

Yaron Koren: The plan was to have one in Germany in May or so...

Sebastian Schaffert: @Daniel: the key is to use URIs that are "local" to the server domain

Sebastian Schaffert: which can be problematic if you want at the same time use ontologies

Yaron Koren: We could have one instead in the U.S., if there's interest.

Joel Natividad: Count me in, perhaps we can time it with SemTech

Yaron Koren: Yeah... although I'm not going to that one.

Yaron Koren: Is anyone from SMW presenting there, do you know?

Sebastian Schaffert: Markus apparently tried to submit a presentation

Yaron Koren: That was me. Unless Markus did too.

Joel Natividad: I also submitted one but the passed on it as well

Yaron Koren: Oh. Maybe it's a trend.

Joel Natividad: like Markus said

Joel Natividad: mail filters

Yaron Koren: So, are you still planning to go?

Joel Natividad: I am. Particularly since Mark said they were planning to host some SMW sessions

Yaron Koren: Hm.

Yaron Koren: Well, I guess that's where the 2nd SMW user meeting will be, then.

Joel Natividad: Great! Maybe we should continue the planning on semediawiki-user mailing list

Yaron Koren: Sure, feel free to send an email. I still don't think I'm going.

Joel Natividad: k. bye all!

PeterYim: bye everyone! a big THANK YOU to all, once again!

anonymous1: bye everyone

OntologySummit2009: "Ontologies as the Next Generation of Information Standards", 2009_01_15

This summit will address the intersection of two active communities, namely the information standards world, and the technical community of ontology and semantic technologies. This intersection is long overdue because each has much to offer the other. Ontologies represent the best efforts of the technical community to unambiguously capture the definitions and interrelationships of concepts in a variety of domains. Information standards are intended to provide unambiguous specifications of information, for the purpose of error-free access and exchange. If the standards community is indeed serious about specifying such information unambiguously to the best of its ability, then the use of ontologies as the vehicle for such specifications is the logical choice.    (1Q35)

Conversely, the information standards world can provide a large market for the industrial use of ontologies, since ontologies are explicitly focused on the representation of information. This will be a boost to worldwide recognition of the utility and power of ontological models.    (1Q36)

The goal of this Ontology Summit 2009 is to articulate the power of synergizing these two communities in the form of a communique in which a number of concrete challenges can be laid out. These challenges could serve as a roadmap that will galvanize both communities and bring this promising technical area to the attention of others. Exactly what challenges are chosen is the subject to be debated and decided upon during the electronic discussion period leading up to the face-to-face meeting in April of 2009.