[tdwg-tag] TDWG ontology revisited ...anewcomer'sperspective

Wed May 20 09:22:23 CEST 2009

OK Jim, I'll see if I can inject some reality over the next few days.

Lee

Lee Belbin
TDWG Secretariat

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Croft [mailto:jim.croft at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 20 May 2009 5:15 PM
To: Piers Higgs
Cc: Lee Belbin; tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
Subject: Re: [tdwg-tag] TDWG ontology revisited ...anewcomer'sperspective

Not sick...  just Western Australian...  different taxon and different
LSID in that part of the world...

Well done on the introductory page Lee - a great starting point and
springboard into deep TDWG.

It is a bit on the squeaky clean side though...  could do with a
section entitled 'Here be Monsters!' or similar...

We don't want people getting a false sense of security and a feeling
that all is right with the world...  if all was right with the world
we would not need to be developing standards...  A standard is, almost
by definition, a response to something not working...  :)

jim

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Piers Higgs <Piers at gaiaresources.com.au>
wrote:
> </lurk>
>
> In the spirit of "sexy and compelling documentation" (Ben, you're sick),
Lee
> has just finished editing two new resources for the TDWG community:
>
> A Getting Started page for newcomers:
> http://www.tdwg.org/getting-started/
>
> A Getting Started wiki
> http://wiki.tdwg.org/twiki/bin/view/Starting/WebHome
>
> The wiki in particular needs us all to start using to help newcomers to
our
> community.  If anyone sees posts like Lynette's please feel free to note
> down the issues and post suggestions or solutions in the wiki.
>
> Nice work Lee!
>
> Piers
>
> <lurk>
> ________________________________
> From: tdwg-tag-bounces at lists.tdwg.org on behalf of Piers Higgs
> Sent: Mon 18/05/2009 7:30 AM
> To: Lee Belbin; tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-tag] TDWG ontology revisited ...anewcomer'sperspective
> [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
>
> </lurk>
>
> Lee and I have had a few emails back and forth over the weekend and have
> started putting things together for newcomers (for those that didn't know,
I
> am one of the volunteers that helps maintain the TDWG web sites).
>
> We're in the process of setting up page content for a "Getting Started"
link
> on the front page of the TDWG web site, and a wiki space for us (as a
> community, not just Lee and I) to document some of the issues newcomers
> face, as raised in this list.  Thanks to all that provided us with the
> catalyst for thinking of this!
>
> This "newcomers" wiki could also serve to host Roger's aspirations for
> somewhere to describe the bioinformatics community - we already have the
> tools and the volunteers to manage this wiki, so it seems like a simple
> thing for us to do - now who wants to help provide content?
>
> Regarding ontologies and the tools to describe them, we could do something
> in the TDWG web space.  Obviously a TWiki implementation isn't going to
> solve everyone's requirements, but is it worth us setting up a simple wiki
> to start with and moving on from there?  If so, then I could set up an
> "ontology" wiki for people to play with under the TDWG site.
>
> Let me know if there are any ideas/thoughts/content that you think would
be
> useful for these pages.
>
> Piers
>
> <lurk>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tdwg-tag-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Lee Belbin
> Sent: Sunday, 17 May 2009 12:24 PM
> To: tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-tag] TDWG ontology revisited ... anewcomer'sperspective
> [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
>
> Hi Chuck
>
> I couldn't agree more. TDWG needs to continually ensure that its work is
> communicated effectively to a 'less technical' audience. At the start of
the
> TDWG Infrastructure Project it was apparent that TDWG was not
communicating
> effectively (or at all) to the bosses/supervisors of the TDWG attendees.
> Newcomers to TDWG are in the same boat.
>
> Piers Higgs in a separate email, suggested that it isn't just a matter of
> which tool in relation to the TDWG ontology. I agree. It is (as I said
> above) a broader educational issue. Piers has suggested a "Getting started
> with TDWG" link on the TDWG home page. An excellent idea (and I really
> wonder why we haven't done this before now!). We do already have a fair
bit
> of introductory (1-page type) material that I'd previously sponsored that
> can be pulled together into one area. I'll then undertake to see what I
can
> do about chasing additional material along the lines you suggested Chuck
to
> fill in the (many I fear!) gaps in understanding.
>
> Lee
>
> Lee Belbin
> TDWG Secretariat
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Miller [mailto:Chuck.Miller at mobot.org]
> Sent: Saturday, 16 May 2009 2:47 AM
> To: Lee Belbin; tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
> Subject: RE: [tdwg-tag] TDWG ontology revisited ... a
newcomer'sperspective
> [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
>
> Lee,
> As you know, I am a proponent of the simple and the understandable,
> particularly for the folks like Lynette.  I am glad to see a couple of
> appeals from the gallery to counterpoint the continuing pursuit of the
> complex issues. The biodiversity informatics/data community like it or not
> is primarily made up of those who do not spend their time expanding the
> limits of web-based semantic inference.  It may very well be that the only
> viable solutions for some of the use cases of biodiversity can only be
> reached by semantic inference.  But, the barrier to entry for folks like
> Lynnette (and there are many, many) is just too high and so solving those
> use cases by web-based semantics is simply out of reach for them.  We must
> accept that.
>
> We positively must enable the folks who do not understand triples, RDF,
OWL,
> SPARQL and the rest to still be able to play in the global biodiversity
data
> sandbox. We must continue to offer methods and techniques that do not
> require this level of knowledge. Call it a "light" version, or whatever
you
> will, but I strongly believe the community at large needs it.
> Unfortunately, that "community at large" doesn't speak up on Taxacom or
TDWG
> much. I fear it's because they can't follow the technical threads and like
> Lynette are baffled and discouraged.
>
> TDWG has to continue to recognize the need to keep it simple, at least in
> part. It's always an 80-20 situation I think.  That does not preclude
> continuing work on the deeper, triples-based approaches for the 20%.  But,
> we must additionally and in parallel provide simpler, compatible
approaches
> for the 80%.  We need to listen to that 80%.
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tdwg-tag-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Lee Belbin
> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 7:38 PM
> To: tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-tag] TDWG ontology revisited ... a
newcomer'sperspective
> [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
>
> Hi Lynette, Greg, Gregor et al.,
>
> I've only just caught up with this thread, but feel obliged to post (I
sound
> like Rich).
>
> A few months ago (and not for the first time), I came to exactly the same
> conclusion as you Lynette. There is I fear, a growing gap between the more
> technical members of TDWG and those who are joining TDWG from applications
> areas such as biology, taxonomy etc. As time goes on, this gap seems more
> evident, and nowhere is this more apparent than with the 'TDWG ontology'.
>
> The TDWG ontology is probably the most important priority we currently
have.
> Your comments about the use of the ontology to help newcomers understand
the
> domain is spot on. I'd also say that the newcomers are in many cases,
domain
> experts who have a lot to contribute to the ontology, but really can't in
> its present form. The ontology is also mandatory if we want to efficiently
> cross link all the various TDWG activities/groups. Recent comments about
> Darwin Core and the TDWG ontology is a prime example!
>
> The ontology is priority-1 for TDWG, BUT (it is a big but), we need
> effective tools (preferably A web based tool) that would EASILY enable
> anyone (not just Protégé experts) to view (in various forms that were
> suitable for the purpose), manage, build, annotate, document, import and
> export bits or all of the ontology/vocabularies is helpful formats.
>
> If TDWG has these issues with developing and using an effective ontology,
> plenty of others must have also! Surely?
>
> I discussed this with Donald and he agreed and said that Greg and Garry
were
> thinking about this as well (as Greg has suggested). I also discussed the
> ontology issue with Gail Kampmeier as she has a graduate student looking
for
> a biodiversity informatics project - and this is a beauty. Markus Döring
> also said at the Fremantle meeting that he was keen to lead work on the
> ontology. I also discussed this same issue a month or so ago with Roger
> (post TONTO :), but I fear that Roger is in the 'techie' category and
didn't
> fully grasp what I was trying to get across about SIMPLE etc. That's
> probably my fault. Your email Lynette seems to have got the point across
> better than I've done.
>
> There is a meeting about the ontology scheduled on the Tuesday evening at
> eBiosphere where Donald, Eamonn, Karen Stocks, hopefully Roger and a few
> others plan to discuss the issues. Please let me know the key issues that
> COULD be addressed at that meeting. Thankfully there seems to be some
> critical mass building about quickly moving forward on the ontology. I'd
> like to see what I can do to ensure that it happens.
>
> There is obviously nothing stopping work on aspects of the ontology such
as
> Roger and Peter have suggested. If I can do anything about setting up a
Wiki
> or similar easy tasks, please let me know.
>
> Lee
>
> Lee Belbin
> TDWG Secretariat
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tdwg-tag-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Greg Whitbread
> Sent: Thursday, 14 May 2009 7:09 PM
> To: Lynette.Woodburn at csiro.au
> Cc: tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-tag] TDWG ontology revisited ... a newcomer's
perspective
> [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
>
> Lynette,
>
> Yes. I agree.  To this end we (Garry is the one with the Twiki skills) are
> experimenting with ways of doing this using the TDWG wiki, one term per
page
> described using dcmi /terms/ namepaces
> http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/ , but alternatives do need to
be
> considered before we make a start. I have just had another look at the
MRTG
> Schema at http://www.keytonature.eu/wiki/MRTG_Schema_v0.7 for instance. A
> solution supporting export to a formal representation would be ideal
though
> if it came to the choice, accessibility should take priority. Somewhere
> between Roger's lsid vocabularies and the MRTG schema page there must be a
> way to achieve this.
>
> Is Semantic-mediawiki an option?
>
> greg
>
> On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 13:30, Lynette.Woodburn at csiro.au wrote:
>> Back to basics ...
>>
>>
>>
>> Anyone new to biodiversity informatics (in general) and TDWG (in
>> particular) might be expected, as a first step, to seek a broad
>> understanding of the scope of the knowledge domain which is of
>> interest to the community they've just joined.  Next, they're likely
>> to want to gain an understanding of each of the main concepts and to
>> discover how those concepts relate to one other.  Delving yet deeper,
>> curiosity will lead them to seek details about features used by the
>> community to characterise each of those main concepts.  So, gradually,
>> it is anticipated that newcomers will gain an understanding of the
>> meaning associated by their fellow community members with elements
>> (concepts, features, relationships) within the knowledge domain.
>> (Those elements are, after all, the chief subjects of discourse
>> amongst community members.)
>>
>>
>>
>> This fantastic voyage of discovery, these first steps into Aladdin's
>> Cave, ought to be made easy for any newcomer.  Instead, TDWG presents
>> a dizzying array of perspectives on disparate subsets of elements
>> within the knowledge domain, often with only cryptic, tenuous links
>> binding them together.  'Horses-for-courses'-drivers clearly exist for
>> these subsets, but where is the common community understanding of
>> where each element fits into the broader, shared knowledge domain
>> which is TDWG's scope?
>>
>>
>>
>> I fully support any initiative which more effectively leads newcomers
>> (and not-so-newcomers) to that place: that place where I would hope to
>> find, in plain expressions devoid of techno-speak, a description of
>> each real world element (concept, feature, relationship), together
>> with a simple representation (a label?) by which the TDWG community
>> prefers each to be referred; that place which evolves, but endures,
>> independently of technological fashions and particular
>> implementations; that place I can visit to paint a picture in my
>> mind's eye of TDWG's own Aladdin's Cave.
>>
>>
>>
>> Lynette Woodburn
>>
>> Atlas of Living Australia
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-tag mailing list
>> tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag
> --
>
>
> australian centre for plant bIodiversity research<------------------+
> national            greg whitBread             voice: +61 2 62509 482
> botanic Integrated Botanical Information System  fax: +61 2 62509 599
> gardens                      S........ I.T. happens.. ghw at anbg.gov.au
> +----------------------------------------->GPO Box 1777 Canberra 2601
>
>
>
> ------
> If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
immediately
> by return e-mail and delete all copies. If this e-mail or any attachments
> have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute waiver of
any
> confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of information in the
> e-mail or attachments.
>
>
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>
> ------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-tag mailing list
> tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag
>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-tag mailing list
> tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-tag mailing list
> tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag
>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-tag mailing list
> tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag
>
>

-- 
_________________
Jim Croft ~ jim.croft at gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~
http://www.google.com/profiles/jim.croft

"Words, as is well known, are the great foes of reality."
- Joseph Conrad, author (1857-1924)

"I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said,
but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."
 - attributed to Robert McCloskey, US State Department spokesman