Leo Obrst, Fabian Neuhaus MITRE, NIST lobrst@mitre, fneuhaus@cme.nist

1. Leo Obrst, Fabian Neuhaus MITRE, NIST lobrst@mitre.org, fneuhaus@cme.nist.gov An Open Ontology Repository:Rationale, Expectations & RequirementsSession 2Joint OOR-Ontology Summit 2008 Panel DiscussionApril 3, 2008 V. 1.10

2. Agenda • Information: • Today’s call (April 3, 2008), continuing from last week: • http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2008_04_03 • Continuing from http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2008_03_27 • Ontology Summit mail list: • http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/ • Look ahead: • Ontology Summit 2008, April 29-30, 2008, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, USA: • Main site: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2008 • NIST Registration site: http://www.mel.nist.gov/div826/msid/sima/interopweek/meetings.htm • Agenda: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2008/FaceToFaceAgenda • Next week (April 10, 2008): Developing an Ontology of Ontologies (for OOR): • http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2008_04_10 • Today: • Focus is on potential content providers for such an OOR • Rationale • Expectations • Requirements

3. Rationale • Why are we interested in an OOR and what purpose does it serve? • Isn’t the Semantic Web notion of distributed islands of semantics sufficient as a de facto repository? • If you put it out there, they will come? • If you build it better and put it out there, they will prefer yours? • History does not show this laissez faire “field of dreams” is good reality • So real rationale: • You can find it simply • It’s registered, so you know who built it • It’s got metadata, so you know the purpose, KR language, user group, etc. • It’s got metadata, so you know what the content subject area is • It’s got mappings, so you can connect it to other ontologies • It’s got quality and value, as gauged by recognized criteria • It’s got services, so that you can map and be mapped, can find and be found, can review/certify and be reviewed/certify, can hook your own services into and can use the services others have hooked in • It’s linked to multiple common middle and upper ontologies • It can be easily extended

4. Expectations • Will the OOR solve everything? • How will we stage our wants and needs? • Can we provide good service to end users, content providers, application developers? • In particular today, what do content providers expect to find and use? • What do content providers expect to be able to provide?

5. Requirements • What’s needed: today, tomorrow, next week? • What do end users need? • What do content providers need? • What do application developers need? • Architecture • Ontology of Ontologies • Quality and Gateway Criteria • State of the Art • OOR the reality: • Requirements -> Design -> Implementation -> Long-term Maintenance & Enhancement • A Technical Roadmap and Realization • How do we ensure long term value, quality, commitment, progress? • Towards the Ontology Summit 2008 Communique

6. Panelists • Dr. Doug Lenat , Cycorp • "Is OpenCyc doomed to be the new Esperanto, or is OOR doomed to be the new Electronic Data Interchange, or -- even worse -- both!" • Mr. Deke Smith, National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) • "National Building Information Modeling Standard" • Dr. Marcia Zeng, Kent State University • "Issues in reusing and sharing the content of thesauri and taxonomies in OOR" • Dr. Denise Bedford, World Bank, Georgetown University, … • "Practical Requirements for Every Day Ontology Management and Use" • Dr. Pat Hayes, Florida Institute for Human & Machine Cognition (IHMC) • "Describing Concept Relationships - A brief guide to the expressive powers of ISO Common Logic" • Ms. Mala Mehrotra, Pragati Synergetic Research • "Exposing and Capturing Mapping Relationships across OOR resources" • Dr. Robert Raskin, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA • "SWEET 2.0 Ontology"