[tdwg-tag] RDF/OWL Good Practices Task Group

Dag Endresen (GBIF) dendresen at gbif.org
Tue Sep 20 10:14:01 CEST 2011

 Dear Joel and Steve,

 I am very interested to take part in the RDF/OWL task group kickoff 
 meeting at TDWG 2011 in New Orleans!

 I have recently started as the new Knowledge Systems Engineer at the 
 GBIF secretariat in Copenhagen. I plan to focus in the first phase on 
 providing tools for collecting terminology and the definition of 
 concepts in use in the biodiversity informatics domain. This will 
 hopefully lead to the mapping of terms in these vocabularies and the 
 development of ontologies to describe the relation and different use of 
 these terms in different parts of our community.

 GBIF provides the http://vocabularies.gbif.org as a tool to collect and 
 discuss vocabularies. This tool was developed at GBIF and the Natural 
 History Museum in London using the Scratchpads and Drupal. I am 
 exploring other supplementary tools such as the Web Protege for 
 collaborative development of domain vocabularies and ontologies. I am 
 also exploring solutions such as the NCBO BioPortal for publishing 
 agreed-upon versions of our vocabularies and ontologies. I would much 
 appreciate feedback and discussions to identify the requirements, 
 priorities and solutions for this task.

 My personal background is from the community of plant genetic resources 
 for agriculture where I have taken an active part in the genebank domain 
 modeling during the last 10 years.

 With best regards
 Dag Endresen

 On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 15:46:44 -0400 (EDT), joel sachs wrote:
> Greetings everyone,
> After some back and forth amongst Steve Baskauf, myself, Greg 
> Whitbread,
> and the executive, we've decided to move forward with an RDF/OWL task
> group, convened under the TAG. Our task will be to deliver a document
> comprising
> i. use cases and competency questions;
> ii. well documented examples of addressing those use cases via rdf 
> and
> sparql; and
> iii. discussion of advantages and disadvantages of the approaches
> illustrated by the examples.
> Our draft charter is at
> http://code.google.com/p/tdwg-rdf/wiki/CharterOfTG
> and we welcome comments, suggestions, and better ideas. One area 
> where
> we're still open is the question of whether or not our deliverable 
> should
> be an official Best Current Practice document [1]. The charter 
> reflects
> our current feeling that it should not. After we deliver our "book of 
> use
> cases and examples", options would include being re-chartered by the 
> to produce a best practices document, spinning off as a "Semantic Web
> Interest Group", or disbanding (either in triumph or despair).
> When we were planning to convene as an Interest Group, several of you
> accepted our invitation to serve as core members, and we hope that
> convening as a Task Group does not change your willingness to do so. 
> If
> you would like to be a core member of the group, and we haven't yet
> contacted you, there's a good chance that we will. But don't wait! 
> Feel
> free to volunteer for core membership. (And recall that you don't 
> have to
> be a "core member to" contribute.)
> In regards timeline, I'd like to incorporate any feedback we receive, 
> and
> submit the charter to the executive at the end of this week, in hopes 
> of
> being chartered by New Orleans.
> Many thanks!
> Joel.
> 1. http://www.tdwg.org/standards/status-and-categories/
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-tag mailing list
> tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag

More information about the tdwg-tag mailing list