|
9th International Forum on Metadata Registry; |
|
International Conference Center Kobe, Port Island , Kobe City, Japan |
|
Local Contact: |
|
2nd Day (21st March, 2006) |
|
Keynote: Semantic Computing and Semantic Services |
|
09:15 - 10:00 |
|
Sam Chance, Scientific Research Corporation, USA |
|
Governments have supported R&D and standards development in the area of metadata registries to manage the semantics of data. Initially driven by the need to derive comprehensive information from queries against disparate, stovepipe computer systems, the emphasis shifted to achieving semantic consistency in XML data interchange, and now is evolving to the management of the semantics underlying data structures. The semantics in these registries may be vetted with broad agency constituencies. The content of these metadata registries, if made available through appropriate services would do a great deal to bootstrap the semantic web and to provide the semantics needed for semantics based computing. Advancements in metadata registry technologies are required to enable the registration of semantic diversity, the linking of semantic correspondences (e.g., across languages, dialects, and disciplines) and the tracking of semantic drift as languages, terms and concepts evolve. Implementing Semantic Service Oriented Architecture concepts could yield an empowering capability. Semantics based computing begins with highly structured data that represents data elements in a machine-interpretable manner. Ontology artifacts may be created and registered in a Semantic Metadata Registry. Metadata may be reposed in a shareable, persistent state for other users (human or agent) to re-use, extend or align with. Sharing not only enables re-use, it also promotes enterprise data element standardization. This results in a more common awareness and understanding and facilitates policy definition and compliance. An exemplar and vital service for semantics based computing, could be a metadata registry exposed as a semantic service. It would facilitate automatic discovery of relevant ontologies or other artifacts required for broad applications. The availability of metadata and/or ontologies in a centralized mechanism promotes ontology sharing, reuse, merging and alignment. Each of these facilitates wide-scale implementation of semantics based computing applications. Software agents will be better able to interact with numerous ontologies to retrieve applicable information. |
|
K1 |
|
10:00- 10:45 |
|
Garhard Budin, Vienna University, Austria |
|
In the effort to achieve convergence and interoperability between and among a variety of knowledge organization schemes involving concept ordering systems, it is all-too easy to assume that structures evolving out of different communities of practice are by their nature parallel. By the same token, differences in terminological usage can lead to unnecessary differences of opinion. In order to ensure mutual understanding and to map the resources back and forth across disciplinary boundaries, it is essential to examine terminological usage and methodological approaches in order better to understand the commonalities and even true differences between the various communities involved. This presentation will create a cross-walk between TC 37 and JTC 1/SC 32 terminology and view some differences in approach to the specification of data elements and their value domains. |
|
K2 |
|
Keynote: Commonalities and Differences between TC 37 and SC32/WG2 in Terminological Usage and Methodological Approach |
|
Standards for Model-Driven Semantics |
|
11:00 - 11:30 |
|
Elisa Kendall Sandpiper Software, Inc. USA. |
|
The Ontology Definition Metamodel (ODM) is an emerging standard from the Object Management Group that supports ontology development and conceptual modeling in several standard representation languages. It provides a coherent framework for visual ontology creation based on OMG’s Meta Object Facility (MOF™) and UML™ (Unified Modeling Language), bridging Model Driven Architecture (MDA®)-based standards for automating the physical management and integration of metadata with Semantic Web technologies. The ODM is nearing finalization in the OMG, and has garnered tremendous support from the W3C Semantic Web best practices working group and the international metadata standards community (ISO JTC1/SC32) in addition to many OMG members. The Ontology PSIG is now considering an agenda for follow-up work that may include: Extensions to the current specification to provide additional MOF QVT-based mappings to and from the Common Logic metamodel. Support for Semantic Web services. Emerging work in rules interchange. Guidelines for interoperability with the recently adopted Semantics for Business Vocabularies and Rules (SBVR), emerging Production Rules Representation (PRR), and the recently initiated Information Modeling & Management (IMM) specifications. In this talk, Ms. Kendall will: Highlight features and status of the ODM specification Discuss related work in the W3C and OMG and provide insight into the roadmap for relating some of the standards (e.g., W3C Semantic Web Services & Rules Interchange, OMG SBVR, PRR and IMM) Discuss the relationships between these standards and others emerging from the ISO/IEC Metadata standards community (e.g., ISO 11179, ISO 19763, XMDR) Present examples of ground-breaking research and the implications for next generation architectures and solutions that embrace the marriage of MDA and Semantic Web technologies.
|
|
P10 |
|
Managing evolutionary ontologies in semantic web service with MMFI4Onto
|
|
11:30- 12:00 |
|
HE Yangfan, HE Keqing, WANG Chong, State Key Laboratory of Software Engineering, Wuhan University, China |
|
As one corner stone of semantic web service, ontology by its own part will experience some evolution. In order to ensure the consistency between ontologies with the same origin, some rules should be defined, registered and applied to constrain the evolution process. MMFI4Onto specifies three abstract frameworks for the registration of ontology, ontology evolution rules and the evolution information respectively, which contribute to the final resolution for the evolution issues of ontologies. |
|
P11 |
|
OntoFrame-K: Semantic Web-based Information Dissemination Platform |
|
12:00 - 12:30 |
|
OntoFrame-K, which is an information dissemination platform for supporting voluntary collaboration among researchers, focuses on the verification and the tracing of information on it, and further Semantic Web-based services. Services on the platform include information dissemination service to support reliable information exchange among researchers and inference services to provide unrevealed information. |
|
P12 |
|
XMDR project challenges, organization and content |
|
14:00 --14:30 |
|
Frank Olken, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, USA |
|
Advances toward semantic computing make it useful to link the data element metadata (definitions, valid values, etc.) to the semantics found in concept systems and Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS). The concept systems and KOSs may vary in size from hundreds of concepts to hundreds of thousands or millions of concepts, along with millions of terms and millions of relationships between concepts. The concept systems may have no relationships between concepts or may have a variety of relationship types (broader-than, narrower than, is-a, has-a …). The concept systems may have simple or complex structures such as directed acyclic graphs, undirected cyclic graphs, faceted classifications, lattices, bipartite graphs, directed graphs, cliques etc. The challenge here is to find the means to register and manage the semantics of: • Data elements, data element concepts, value domains, and other metadata associated with data systems and XML schemas, • Concept systems and knowledge organization systems, including keywords, thesauri, taxonomies, ontologies, axiomatized ontologies, • Relationships between the data elements and concepts, • Relationships between the concepts themselves.
An additional challenge is to provide services that make the above useful for designing and maintaining databases, for XML data transfers, for agent based computing, and for semantic computing such as the semantic web. This presentation describes the eXtended Metadata Registry (XMDR) project challenges, participants and content. |
|
P13 |
|
Hanmin JUNG, KISTI (Korea Institute of Science and Technology), Korea, |
|
12:30 14:00 |
|
Lunch Break |
|
Framework for Meta Model Interoperability --Metamodel for Ontology Registration |
|
14:30 --15:00 |
|
Masao Okabe, Tokyo Electric Power Company, Japan |
|
To promote ontology-based interoperation among application systems, there are two key issues. First, a mechanism that enables an application system to trust an ontology. Second, loose harmonization of ontologies, irrelevant to what language they are described in. In this presentation, MMF Ontology registration, a part of the multipart standard ISO/IEC 19763, is presented as a solution to these issues. |
|
P14 |
|
Ontology Design Using Topic Maps in Korean Cultural Artifacts Domain |
|
15:00 -- 15:30 |
|
Sam Oh, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Korea |
|
This presentation describes potential use of topic maps in the design of ontologies. The concepts and terms are in the domain of Korean Cultural Artifacts. |
|
P15 |
|
XMDR prototype |
|
16:00 - 16:30 |
|
Kevin Keck Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, USA |
|
This presentation describes semantic functionality proposed by the eXtended Metadata Registry (XMDR) project, which is making proposals for Edition 3 of 11179. It also describes the development of a prototype to demonstrate the functionality. This includes the architecture of the prototype and open source software being used in the implementation. |
|
P16 |
|
15:30 16:00 |
|
Coffee Break |
|
17:00-- 17:30 |
|
P18 |
|
Relationships Among Concepts In A Concept Field |
|
Bodil Nistrup Madsen, Copenhagen Business School, Denmark |
|
Terminologists traditionally create terminological concept systems in the course of their work in order to plot the relationships among concepts in a concept field and to write rigorous, coherent definitions. Many features of these concept systems function in parallel to practices followed in the creation of ontologies, as well as the plotting of classification schemes (11179-2) in the context of metadata registries. These different approaches to the task of knowledge organization provide a productive framework for comparisons between different communities of practice. Of special interest with respect to the development of multilingual terminology databases is the problem of mapping concept systems for anisomorphic concepts, i.e., concepts that are not consistent across the boundaries separating language communities. This presentation will introduce a view of multifaceted, multilingual concept systems designed to negotiate between overlapping notions, sometimes involving multiple term entries designed to represent divergent concept structures. |
|
10:45 - 11:00 |
|
Coffee Break |
|
P17 |
|
16:30--17:00 |
|
A Methodology for Developing a Taxonomy for an Organization Using Subject Areas |
|
Within the U.S. government, the U.S. Department of Transportation has a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for providing air traffic control services and fostering aviation safety. In the U.S. federal agencies, taxonomies are being called for as a way to organize and categorize information about an organization in order to facilitate search and retrieval efforts. This presentation will describe the methodology that was used by the FAA to create a taxonomy of its business. Its methodology draws from a corporate data model. The entities and subject areas from the FAA data models are organized into a subject-oriented taxonomy of the FAA. This will be contrasted with functionally oriented taxonomies. |
|
Richard Jordan, Federal Aviation Administration United States of America (USA) |