Difference between revisions of "Other Meetings and Notes"
From Metadata-Registry
(→Agenda) |
|||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
* 10:00-11:00 | * 10:00-11:00 | ||
** Define coarse feature set for schemes and schemas, with basic tasks to accomplish for each | ** Define coarse feature set for schemes and schemas, with basic tasks to accomplish for each | ||
| + | |||
| + | DECISION: We will be SKOS-centric, with emerging OWL capability. | ||
INPUTS: | INPUTS: | ||
| Line 35: | Line 37: | ||
#Register external vocabularies with URIs established by the registry | #Register external vocabularies with URIs established by the registry | ||
#Search, browse, display terms, relationships, etc. | #Search, browse, display terms, relationships, etc. | ||
| − | |||
OUTPUTS: | OUTPUTS: | ||
| − | #Lossless output of externally managed vocabularies that have been slurped (SKOS, OWL) | + | #Lossless output of externally managed vocabularies that have been slurped in their native format (SKOS, OWL) |
| + | #Output of vocabularies in either SKOS or OWL, no matter their original format | ||
| + | |||
NOTE: Need new definition of "hosted" and use case where maintainer is managing the vocabulary with our tools, but the registry does not hold the "canonical" version ("not hosted" in our lingo). Also has implications for verification--do we periodically check vocabularies with non-Registry URIs for changes, missing terms, etc. | NOTE: Need new definition of "hosted" and use case where maintainer is managing the vocabulary with our tools, but the registry does not hold the "canonical" version ("not hosted" in our lingo). Also has implications for verification--do we periodically check vocabularies with non-Registry URIs for changes, missing terms, etc. | ||
Revision as of 08:34, 14 October 2005
F2F Meeting, Oct. 14, 2005, Ithaca, NY
Agenda
- 9:00-10:00 Goals for the project: defining "success"
- Is it usage? If so, how many (users, vocabularies, terms?)
Goal: 10 Organizations/50 vocabularies
- Is it functionality? (can do all five below? and are all functions equally important?)
- Creating/registering/maintaining a scheme (controlled vocabulary) and its member terms
- Creating/registering/maintaining a schema (element/property set) and its member terms
- Creating/registering/maintaining an application profile
- Creating/registering/maintaining of a scheme-to-scheme mapping (value spaces)
- Creating/registering/maintaining of a schema-to-schema mapping (element/properties)
- Is it functionality? (can do all five below? and are all functions equally important?)
First three are contractually mandated, last two "good if we can." Application profiles least baked.
- Promises about Semantic Web applicability (RDF, etc.) needs to be addressed. Specifically management in RDF "space" counts towards success to NSF in its research mode. Decisions about how far to go will be made in the context of what is needed for the functionality.
What's the registry for? Still for discovery and reuse, avoiding reinvention of wheels. Also promote use by machines, rather than reliance on humans (also support and management). At the basic level, provide discovery and identification of vocabularies at the description level, which do not have term-level information available.
- 10:00-11:00
- Define coarse feature set for schemes and schemas, with basic tasks to accomplish for each
DECISION: We will be SKOS-centric, with emerging OWL capability.
INPUTS:
- Externally managed vocabularies (SKOS, OWL)
FUNCTIONS:
- Data management
- Vocabulary management
- Register agents (users, organizations, maintainers, etc.) and manage
- Register external vocabularies with no terms
- Register external vocabularies with external URIs assigned by owner
- Register external vocabularies with URIs established by the registry
- Search, browse, display terms, relationships, etc.
OUTPUTS:
- Lossless output of externally managed vocabularies that have been slurped in their native format (SKOS, OWL)
- Output of vocabularies in either SKOS or OWL, no matter their original format
NOTE: Need new definition of "hosted" and use case where maintainer is managing the vocabulary with our tools, but the registry does not hold the "canonical" version ("not hosted" in our lingo). Also has implications for verification--do we periodically check vocabularies with non-Registry URIs for changes, missing terms, etc.
- 11:00-noon
- Attach priorities to each feature in terms of stakeholder and client satisfaction:
- A (must have)
- B (nice to have)
- C (add it if we can)
- D (future grants)
- Determine complexity and assess risk for each feature
- Attach priorities to each feature in terms of stakeholder and client satisfaction:
- 12:30-1:30
- Road map, includes timelines and milestones [a.k.a. "release dates"--may be internal]
- Try to assign 'must have' features to milestones
- Road map, includes timelines and milestones [a.k.a. "release dates"--may be internal]
- 1:30-2:00
- Review progress
- Review task lists
- 2:00-3:30
- Add external review and testing tasks/timelines?
- 4:00-5:00
- Communication, documentation, meetings
- Can we agree on "communication protocols" amongst the group?
- How often do we need F2F meetings, telecons?
- What are our expectations re: internal and external documentations?
- Communication, documentation, meetings
