<HTML dir=ltr><HEAD><TITLE>Re: [tdwg-tag] TDWG ontology revisited ... anewcomer'sperspective [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=unicode">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6001.18226" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText39251 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Lee,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>An introduction to TDWG section would be a great start for the newcomers. I agree it's something we should have done a while back. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>Chuck</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><BR>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org on behalf of Lee Belbin<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sat 5/16/2009 11:23 PM<BR><B>To:</B> tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [tdwg-tag] TDWG ontology revisited ... anewcomer'sperspective [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P><FONT size=2>Hi Chuck<BR><BR>I couldn't agree more. TDWG needs to continually ensure that its work is<BR>communicated effectively to a 'less technical' audience. At the start of the<BR>TDWG Infrastructure Project it was apparent that TDWG was not communicating<BR>effectively (or at all) to the bosses/supervisors of the TDWG attendees.<BR>Newcomers to TDWG are in the same boat. <BR><BR>Piers Higgs in a separate email, suggested that it isn't just a matter of<BR>which tool in relation to the TDWG ontology. I agree. It is (as I said<BR>above) a broader educational issue. Piers has suggested a "Getting started<BR>with TDWG" link on the TDWG home page. An excellent idea (and I really<BR>wonder why we haven't done this before now!). We do already have a fair bit<BR>of introductory (1-page type) material that I'd previously sponsored that<BR>can be pulled together into one area. I'll then undertake to see what I can<BR>do about chasing additional material along the lines you suggested Chuck to<BR>fill in the (many I fear!) gaps in understanding.<BR><BR>Lee<BR><BR>Lee Belbin<BR>TDWG Secretariat<BR><BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: Chuck Miller [<A href="mailto:Chuck.Miller@mobot.org">mailto:Chuck.Miller@mobot.org</A>]<BR>Sent: Saturday, 16 May 2009 2:47 AM<BR>To: Lee Belbin; tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org<BR>Subject: RE: [tdwg-tag] TDWG ontology revisited ... a newcomer'sperspective<BR>[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]<BR><BR>Lee,<BR>As you know, I am a proponent of the simple and the understandable,<BR>particularly for the folks like Lynette. I am glad to see a couple of<BR>appeals from the gallery to counterpoint the continuing pursuit of the<BR>complex issues. The biodiversity informatics/data community like it or not<BR>is primarily made up of those who do not spend their time expanding the<BR>limits of web-based semantic inference. It may very well be that the only<BR>viable solutions for some of the use cases of biodiversity can only be<BR>reached by semantic inference. But, the barrier to entry for folks like<BR>Lynnette (and there are many, many) is just too high and so solving those<BR>use cases by web-based semantics is simply out of reach for them. We must<BR>accept that.<BR><BR>We positively must enable the folks who do not understand triples, RDF, OWL,<BR>SPARQL and the rest to still be able to play in the global biodiversity data<BR>sandbox. We must continue to offer methods and techniques that do not<BR>require this level of knowledge. Call it a "light" version, or whatever you<BR>will, but I strongly believe the community at large needs it.<BR>Unfortunately, that "community at large" doesn't speak up on Taxacom or TDWG<BR>much. I fear it's because they can't follow the technical threads and like<BR>Lynette are baffled and discouraged.<BR><BR>TDWG has to continue to recognize the need to keep it simple, at least in<BR>part. It's always an 80-20 situation I think. That does not preclude<BR>continuing work on the deeper, triples-based approaches for the 20%. But,<BR>we must additionally and in parallel provide simpler, compatible approaches<BR>for the 80%. We need to listen to that 80%.<BR><BR>Chuck<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org<BR>[<A href="mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org">mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org</A>] On Behalf Of Lee Belbin<BR>Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 7:38 PM<BR>To: tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org<BR>Subject: Re: [tdwg-tag] TDWG ontology revisited ... a newcomer'sperspective<BR>[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]<BR><BR>Hi Lynette, Greg, Gregor et al.,<BR><BR>I've only just caught up with this thread, but feel obliged to post (I sound<BR>like Rich).<BR><BR>A few months ago (and not for the first time), I came to exactly the same<BR>conclusion as you Lynette. There is I fear, a growing gap between the more<BR>technical members of TDWG and those who are joining TDWG from applications<BR>areas such as biology, taxonomy etc. As time goes on, this gap seems more<BR>evident, and nowhere is this more apparent than with the 'TDWG ontology'.<BR><BR>The TDWG ontology is probably the most important priority we currently have.<BR>Your comments about the use of the ontology to help newcomers understand the<BR>domain is spot on. I'd also say that the newcomers are in many cases, domain<BR>experts who have a lot to contribute to the ontology, but really can't in<BR>its present form. The ontology is also mandatory if we want to efficiently<BR>cross link all the various TDWG activities/groups. Recent comments about<BR>Darwin Core and the TDWG ontology is a prime example!<BR><BR>The ontology is priority-1 for TDWG, BUT (it is a big but), we need<BR>effective tools (preferably A web based tool) that would EASILY enable<BR>anyone (not just Protégé experts) to view (in various forms that were<BR>suitable for the purpose), manage, build, annotate, document, import and<BR>export bits or all of the ontology/vocabularies is helpful formats.<BR><BR>If TDWG has these issues with developing and using an effective ontology,<BR>plenty of others must have also! Surely?<BR><BR>I discussed this with Donald and he agreed and said that Greg and Garry were<BR>thinking about this as well (as Greg has suggested). I also discussed the<BR>ontology issue with Gail Kampmeier as she has a graduate student looking for<BR>a biodiversity informatics project - and this is a beauty. Markus Döring<BR>also said at the Fremantle meeting that he was keen to lead work on the<BR>ontology. I also discussed this same issue a month or so ago with Roger<BR>(post TONTO :), but I fear that Roger is in the 'techie' category and didn't<BR>fully grasp what I was trying to get across about SIMPLE etc. That's<BR>probably my fault. Your email Lynette seems to have got the point across<BR>better than I've done.<BR><BR>There is a meeting about the ontology scheduled on the Tuesday evening at<BR>eBiosphere where Donald, Eamonn, Karen Stocks, hopefully Roger and a few<BR>others plan to discuss the issues. Please let me know the key issues that<BR>COULD be addressed at that meeting. Thankfully there seems to be some<BR>critical mass building about quickly moving forward on the ontology. I'd<BR>like to see what I can do to ensure that it happens.<BR><BR>There is obviously nothing stopping work on aspects of the ontology such as<BR>Roger and Peter have suggested. If I can do anything about setting up a Wiki<BR>or similar easy tasks, please let me know.<BR><BR>Lee<BR><BR>Lee Belbin<BR>TDWG Secretariat<BR><BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org<BR>[<A href="mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org">mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org</A>] On Behalf Of Greg Whitbread<BR>Sent: Thursday, 14 May 2009 7:09 PM<BR>To: Lynette.Woodburn@csiro.au<BR>Cc: tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org<BR>Subject: Re: [tdwg-tag] TDWG ontology revisited ... a newcomer's perspective<BR>[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]<BR><BR>Lynette,<BR><BR>Yes. I agree. To this end we (Garry is the one with the Twiki skills) are<BR>experimenting with ways of doing this using the TDWG wiki, one term per page<BR>described using dcmi /terms/ namepaces<BR><A href="http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/">http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/</A> , but alternatives do need to be<BR>considered before we make a start. I have just had another look at the MRTG<BR>Schema at <A href="http://www.keytonature.eu/wiki/MRTG_Schema_v0.7">http://www.keytonature.eu/wiki/MRTG_Schema_v0.7</A> for instance. A<BR>solution supporting export to a formal representation would be ideal though<BR>if it came to the choice, accessibility should take priority. Somewhere<BR>between Roger's lsid vocabularies and the MRTG schema page there must be a<BR>way to achieve this. <BR><BR>Is Semantic-mediawiki an option?<BR><BR>greg<BR><BR>On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 13:30, Lynette.Woodburn@csiro.au wrote:<BR>> Back to basics ...<BR>><BR>> <BR>><BR>> Anyone new to biodiversity informatics (in general) and TDWG (in<BR>> particular) might be expected, as a first step, to seek a broad<BR>> understanding of the scope of the knowledge domain which is of<BR>> interest to the community they've just joined. Next, they're likely<BR>> to want to gain an understanding of each of the main concepts and to<BR>> discover how those concepts relate to one other. Delving yet deeper,<BR>> curiosity will lead them to seek details about features used by the<BR>> community to characterise each of those main concepts. So, gradually,<BR>> it is anticipated that newcomers will gain an understanding of the<BR>> meaning associated by their fellow community members with elements<BR>> (concepts, features, relationships) within the knowledge domain.<BR>> (Those elements are, after all, the chief subjects of discourse<BR>> amongst community members.)<BR>><BR>> <BR>><BR>> This fantastic voyage of discovery, these first steps into Aladdin's<BR>> Cave, ought to be made easy for any newcomer. Instead, TDWG presents<BR>> a dizzying array of perspectives on disparate subsets of elements<BR>> within the knowledge domain, often with only cryptic, tenuous links<BR>> binding them together. 'Horses-for-courses'-drivers clearly exist for<BR>> these subsets, but where is the common community understanding of<BR>> where each element fits into the broader, shared knowledge domain<BR>> which is TDWG's scope?<BR>><BR>> <BR>><BR>> I fully support any initiative which more effectively leads newcomers<BR>> (and not-so-newcomers) to that place: that place where I would hope to<BR>> find, in plain expressions devoid of techno-speak, a description of<BR>> each real world element (concept, feature, relationship), together<BR>> with a simple representation (a label?) by which the TDWG community<BR>> prefers each to be referred; that place which evolves, but endures,<BR>> independently of technological fashions and particular<BR>> implementations; that place I can visit to paint a picture in my<BR>> mind's eye of TDWG's own Aladdin's Cave.<BR>><BR>> <BR>><BR>> Lynette Woodburn<BR>><BR>> Atlas of Living Australia<BR>><BR>> <BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> ______________________________________________________________________<BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> tdwg-tag mailing list<BR>> tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org<BR>> <A href="http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag">http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag</A><BR>--<BR><BR><BR>australian centre for plant bIodiversity research<------------------+<BR>national greg whitBread voice: +61 2 62509 482<BR>botanic Integrated Botanical Information System fax: +61 2 62509 599<BR>gardens S........ I.T. happens.. ghw@anbg.gov.au<BR>+----------------------------------------->GPO Box 1777 Canberra 2601<BR><BR><BR><BR>------<BR>If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately<BR>by return e-mail and delete all copies. If this e-mail or any attachments<BR>have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute waiver of any<BR>confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of information in the<BR>e-mail or attachments.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Please consider the environment before printing this email.<BR><BR>------<BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>tdwg-tag mailing list<BR>tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org<BR><A href="http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag">http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag</A><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>tdwg-tag mailing list<BR>tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org<BR><A href="http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag">http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag</A><BR></FONT></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>