working group proposal

5 views
Skip to first unread message

Arlin Stoltzfus

unread,
Nov 20, 2012, 3:08:12 PM11/20/12
to wg-...@googlegroups.com
Dear all--

Thanks to the efforts of Rob, Matt, Hilmar and others, a proposal is starting to emerge here:  

 
The goal is to facilitate aggregation and linking across multiple services or namebanks, so as to better deliver expert name-mappings to users doing data integration.  The perceived means to achieve that goal is standardization, with the qualification that the preferred strategy is to draw on ontologies to represent taxon information as an aid to flexible (including lightweight) discovery and reasoning.   The practical focus is on addressing demand (use-cases in data integration), especially where it involves key projects such as OToL, EoL, Map of Life, etc. 

I hope that outline is broad enough to provide opportunities for all of you to participate.  I wish we had more time for a deliberative group process to arrive at the goals together, but I'm afraid that isn't practical.   Again, I apologize for the rushed nature of this project.  

So, I would suggest, by way of preparing for the teleconference tomorrow (connection info will be sent separately), to think about what you can bring to that kind of plan, and to consider adding your thoughts to the proposal text.  What key challenges can you see based on your experience?   What resources can you bring to the project, including use-cases, code, expertise, time?  Are you willing to be a PI on the proposal?   (note that Rob and Matt have volunteered, and I have withdrawn from that role)  Can you help us rush through this over the next 10 days to get it done?  

Arlin
-------
Arlin Stoltzfus (ar...@umd.edu)
Fellow, IBBR; Adj. Assoc. Prof., UMCP; Research Biologist, NIST
IBBR, 9600 Gudelsky Drive, Rockville, MD, 20850
tel: 240 314 6208; web: www.molevol.org

David Patterson

unread,
Nov 20, 2012, 5:53:18 PM11/20/12
to Arlin Stoltzfus, wg-...@googlegroups.com
I recommend an emphasis on Use Cases during the conference call.

Paddy


--
 
 



--
___________________________________
David J Patterson

Senior Scientist, Marine Biological Laboratory
7 MBL Street, Woods Hole, MASS 02543, USA.

Research Professor
School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ 85287-4501

Professor (MBL) Ecology and Evolutionary Biology
Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
 
Life Sciences Lead, Data Conservancy dataconservancy.org

globalnames.org


David Patterson

unread,
Nov 20, 2012, 6:01:13 PM11/20/12
to Arlin Stoltzfus, wg-...@googlegroups.com
Also,

I was going to paste in Arlin's succinct statement of purpose into the Google doc, but have changed it - perhaps dramatically.

Somewhere in the past I used the term 'standardization' in the context of interest to refer to a solution that leads to an agreed best name for a taxon.  I then dismissed this as an inappropriate solution (reasons are distributed within the document but (a) the 'correct' name changes because of taxonomic and phylogenetic insights, (b) different experts have different views as to what the 'correct' name might be.  I see the approaches of reconciliation and resolution as being better than standardization, and in a sense embraces standardization.

Would help if to know if I am going off at a tangent.

PAddy 

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Arlin Stoltzfus <ar...@umd.edu> wrote:

--
 
 

Arlin Stoltzfus

unread,
Nov 21, 2012, 11:53:20 AM11/21/12
to wg-...@googlegroups.com
On Nov 20, 2012, at 5:53 PM, David Patterson wrote:

I recommend an emphasis on Use Cases during the conference call.

Thanks.  I agree that this should be the main emphasis.   After we get some preliminaries out of the way, I would like to get a quick list of major use-cases, and a quick sense of similarities and differences.  But we also need to have some discussion about what the working group will produce-- standards, whitepapers, reference implementations, ?   

Arlin

Nicolson, David

unread,
Nov 21, 2012, 12:35:30 PM11/21/12
to Arlin Stoltzfus, wg-...@googlegroups.com
Dear all,
I have to bow out for the moment, due to another meeting. I will try to return...
Dave

David Nicolson
Data Development Coordinator, Integrated Taxonomic Information System
Biologist, USGS Core Science Systems, Core Science Analytics & Synthesis Program
nico...@si.edu Office 202-633-2149 Fax 202-786-2934
http://www.itis.gov/
http://www.cbif.gc.ca/itis/
"Nihil sumas necesse est..."




-----Original Message-----
From: wg-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:wg-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Arlin Stoltzfus
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 11:53 AM
To: wg-...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: working group proposal

On Nov 20, 2012, at 5:53 PM, David Patterson wrote:


I recommend an emphasis on Use Cases during the conference call.


Thanks. I agree that this should be the main emphasis. After we get some preliminaries out of the way, I would like to get a quick list of major use-cases, and a quick sense of similarities and differences. But we also need to have some discussion about what the working group will produce-- standards, whitepapers, reference implementations, ?

Arlin


Paddy


On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Arlin Stoltzfus <ar...@umd.edu> wrote:


Dear all--

Thanks to the efforts of Rob, Matt, Hilmar and others, a proposal is starting to emerge here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fsVxkTtl-Q3Na5ZNNdOvV5OwDjra9V3VpLtd5xzDJZY/edit

The goal is to facilitate aggregation and linking across multiple services or namebanks, so as to better deliver expert name-mappings to users doing data integration. The perceived means to achieve that goal is standardization, with the qualification that the preferred strategy is to draw on ontologies to represent taxon information as an aid to flexible (including lightweight) discovery and reasoning. The practical focus is on addressing demand (use-cases in data integration), especially where it involves key projects such as OToL, EoL, Map of Life, etc.

I hope that outline is broad enough to provide opportunities for all of you to participate. I wish we had more time for a deliberative group process to arrive at the goals together, but I'm afraid that isn't practical. Again, I apologize for the rushed nature of this project.

So, I would suggest, by way of preparing for the teleconference tomorrow (connection info will be sent separately), to think about what you can bring to that kind of plan, and to consider adding your thoughts to the proposal text. What key challenges can you see based on your experience? What resources can you bring to the project, including use-cases, code, expertise, time? Are you willing to be a PI on the proposal? (note that Rob and Matt have volunteered, and I have withdrawn from that role) Can you help us rush through this over the next 10 days to get it done?

Arlin


-------
Arlin Stoltzfus (ar...@umd.edu)
Fellow, IBBR; Adj. Assoc. Prof., UMCP; Research Biologist, NIST
IBBR, 9600 Gudelsky Drive, Rockville, MD, 20850
tel: 240 314 6208 <tel:240%20314%206208> ; web: www.molevol.org <http://www.molevol.org/>





--







--
___________________________________
David J Patterson

Senior Scientist, Marine Biological Laboratory
7 MBL Street, Woods Hole, MASS 02543, USA.

Research Professor
School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ 85287-4501

Professor (MBL) Ecology and Evolutionary Biology
Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island

Life Sciences Lead, Data Conservancy dataconservancy.org <http://dataconservancy.org/>

globalnames.org <http://globalnames.org/>
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages