[Clement Jonquet]

Hi all,
December is approaching, and it seems to me that Agrisemantics must have something in this special issue.
Any motivation to publish the Recommendations of the group (the 39 hints …)
Something else?
Any thoughts?
Clement

[Clement Jonquet]

Dear Yann, all,
I hope the FAIRsFAIR pre-meeting was productive.
Indeed FAIR semantics certainly goes beyond just describing semantic resources with right metadata. As I mentioned, as ontology repository provider, we do ask ourselves all the questions. Because we are building « data repositories » as others… our data are just ontologies.
We are totally open to collaborate on this and willing to participate if there will be action/meeting etc.
If a WG (as RDA defines it with recommandations, timing, deliverables, etc.) is proposed, then we will of course join and participate and then certainly merge our TG (as VSSIG defines it without the requirement of a WG) with it.
But if you’re talking about another TG, then I don’t think it’s necessary to have two and we can discuss rebrand the « ontology metadata » TG to something larger to match « FAIR semantics ».
Biswanath will give a short report Friday. And we can discuss more then.
Bye
Clement
PS: very good to know for your assignment at CINES on EOSC-Pillar. Let’s meet again in Montpellier then… will continue off list !

[Clement Jonquet]

Dear Yann, all,
I am very pleased to see this session at RDA P14. As you know we are precisely investigating the issue of FAIR semantics in the Ontology Metadata task group since VSSIG rebranding in 2017.
I have presented about this at RDA P11 IGAD’s premeeting, along with Barbara’s during RDA P11 VSSIG section.
https://www.slideshare.net/jonquet/fair-data-requires-fair-ontologies-ho…
Our three main results (with B. Dutta, CC) were:
MOD1.2, a vocabulary for ontology metadata description: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/lirmm-01605783
A case study and implementation on the AgroPortal ontology repository: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13740-018-0091-5
A survey and its analysis about ontology metadata: https://zenodo.org/record/3484530#.XaQ1v5MzbUI
Biswanath and I are still regularly interacting on MOD1.4
https://github.com/sifrproject/MOD-Ontology (sse branch) and we are trying to find some support to move to MOD2.0 that will be based on new DCAT.
Yann, it would be great to see your initiative on FAIR semantics joining us in this effort of making semantic resources (of course we are not interested only in ontologies) more FAIR. I am eager to see what you have in mind and to move forward on this subject. I understood FAIRsFAIR has a task on this and is willing to help, perfect!
Unfortunately, I will not be in P14 nor Biswanath or Anne. And even worst, at the same time I will be participating to the Agrisemantics session which is at the same time. So I cannot give another presentation about our work and results.
Maybe Biswanath can?
Happy to discuss this further. Please keep us in the loop.
It would be too bad to restart from scratch another branch or task group on the topic of FAIR semantics in VSSIG. Plus, we (the ontology/vocabulary repository providers: BioPortal, OLS, AgroPortal, etc.) offer definitively the perfect environments to make FAIR semantics a reality 😉
Bye
Clement
——————————————————————————————-
Dr. Clement JONQUET – PhD in Informatics – Associate Professor
University of Montpellier (LIRMM)
—————————————————————————————————————————————

FAIR data requires FAIR ontologies, how do we do? from INRAE (MISTEA) and University of Montpellier (LIRMM)

[Clement Jonquet]

Dear Richard,
All
Will not get into the SKOS or OWL debate. Depending on what you want to model, SKOS is a good starter than ultimately you might need to pass to OWL for more expressivity.
Dear Richard,
All
Will not get into the SKOS or OWL debate. Depending on what you want to model, SKOS is a good starter than ultimately you might need to pass to OWL for more expressivity.
Could you tell us more about :
> but experiment names, fields and plots are not represented by any controlled vocabularly.
>
Can you list exactly the terms/concepts that you will be interested in modeling? Is the specificity of these experiments the fact that they are long-term only ?
Because, I have the feeling you can certainly attach this to other existing vocabularies out there…
You might consider using the AgroPortal Recommender which could help identify what are the ontologies that have good coverage over a certain list of terms.
In case you decide to create your own new URIs (because you really have to say something specific about them), we can help you map your new vocabulary to existing ones in AgroPortal (we have someone now in the team, Elcio, who recently joined us to support users into this process). And of course, host it in AgroPortal.
Will be in Berlin too, to discuss.
Clement
——————————————————————————————-
Dr. Clement JONQUET – PhD in Informatics – Assistant Professor
University of Montpellier
http://www.lirmm.fr/~jonquet
——————————————————————————————

[Clement Jonquet]

Dear members,
For those that have received another survey email from me today, please note there a re two surveys:
(Sorry for the concomitence)
Dear members,
For those that have received another survey email from me today, please note there a re two surveys:
(Sorry for the concomitence)
One for AgroPortal users only (related to that changes in the ontology metadata model we have made in AgroPortal in 2017):
> https://goo.gl/aXwwhT
One for any one interested in ontologies that we have prepared with the RDA VSSIG ontology metadata task group :
https://goo.gl/tXaaMf
As you understood, all of this is related but our work on AgroPortal preceded the RDA VSSIG and now we need both a small eval of what we have done on AgroPortal and some insights to move further.
Bye
Clement
Cordialement
Clement Jonquet

[Clement Jonquet]

Hello all,
I am not sure that I will be able to do the call. But I am clear in my mind about the Landscaping report: one of us should scarify to work on this 1 month and change it into a review journal paper.
Bye
Clement

[Clement Jonquet]

Dear VSSIG group and task group,
I have started giving some back ground information on the Slack channel :
https://vocabulary-services.slack.com/messages/C7GJM7U57/
Please join us!
Clement
Dr. Clement JONQUET – PhD in Informatics – Assistant Professor
University of Montpellier
Coordinator of the SIFR and AgroPortal
projects
Visiting scholar, Stanford University (EU Marie Curie fellow)
***@***.***
http://www.lirmm.fr/~jonquet
@Montpellier : +33/4 67 14 97 43
@Stanford : +1 650 723 6725
De : jgraybeal=***@***.***-groups.org
[mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] De la part de graybeal
Envoyé : vendredi 13 octobre 2017 12:18
À : starred ; biswanathdutta ;
Vocabulary Services Interest Group
Cc : simon.cox
Objet : Re: [vocabulary_services] Next steps – formation of task groups
May I suggest that those interested in this group and topics continue the
dialog on the ontology slack channel? That will enable all of us focusing on
that channel to engage, and consolidate the group purpose discussions (which
may be diverging).
Thanks!
John
_____________________________
From: starred
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 09:44
Subject: Re: [vocabulary_services] Next steps – formation of task groups
To: biswanathdutta ,
Vocabulary Services Interest Group <***@***.***-groups.org
>
Cc: simon.cox
Dear Biswanath,
thanks for your clarification. Indeed I separated the two set of
vocabularies in my examples (ontology metadata vocabularies, such as VOAF,
and dataset metadata vocabularies).
I think also there could be some terminological issue as the word
“vocabulary” is very ambiguous, and it’s very nasty as the word “vocabulary”
tends to be a term with precise meanings, just that they are different
depending on the community of reference 🙂 so that for logicians the word
vocabulary is reserved to ontologies (in general, a vocabulary is expected
to provide symbols predicating over domain objects), while in some others –
e.g. librarians – it could be perfect for thesauri (e.g. in the thesaurus
Agrovoc the “voc” stands for vocabulary) as they use thesauri to index
documents. Funnily enough, the same ambiguity or dependency on perspective
would apply to data (e.g. a thesaurus is data represented through the SKOS
ontology…vocabulary).
But we can put aside for a while these terminological issues, and move to
ground examples that somehow should allow us to lay down our classification
markers. Putting things together, I see two counterexamples to your
observations about VoID&co:
1. In VOAF (definitely an ontology metadata vocabulary, as the V stands
for Vocabulary, in the “ontology” sense of the word, widely adopted in the
SW community), an ontology is a subclass of void:Dataset
(http://lov.okfn.org/vocommons/voaf/v2.3/#Vocabulary), exactly because void
can be applied to datasets in general, including ontologies. Thus void is
interesting enough for ontologies (you can see that its descriptors and
statistical info are indeed relevant for any set of triples published on the
web, whatever their nature, and thus including ontologies).
2. If I properly resolved your “e.g.-attachment”, you just mentioned
Agrovoc as avocabulary opposed to data cataloguing, and thus out of those
metadata vocabularies I listed in the “dataset in general” list. I think
however that this filehttp://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/void.ttl (a VoID/LIME
description of Agrovoc, which is linked through the void:inDataset property
attached to each Agrovoc entity, see:http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_12332
for an example) seems to depict quite a lot of interesting stuff about it.
So, sorry, hope mine was not an annoying set of observations. I’m just
humbly trying to set my compass.
Kind Regards,
Armando
P.S: good, it seems we will meet in MTSR in a month and a half 😉
From: dutta2005=***@***.***-groups.org

[mailto:***@***.***-groups.org]On Behalf Of biswanathdutta
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 3:36 PM
To: starred ;
Vocabulary Services Interest Group <***@***.***-groups.org
>
Cc: simon.cox
Subject: Re: [vocabulary_services] Next steps – formation of task groups
Dear Armando,
Thank you for raising this question. I see your point that the
tasks should have been detailed possibly with some existing examples/
standards, if any.
Coming to the examples like void, dcat that you mentioned, IMO, are more
relevant to the data cataloguing than the Vocabulary/ Ontology (e.g.
Agrovoc) descriptions. The more relevent metadata standard for Ontology /
Vocabulary description is OMV (Ontology Metadata Vocabulary), and very
recently MOD (Metadata for Ontology Description and publication).
In this task our objective (Clement may add more points) is to improve/
extend these existing works (OMV, MOD), and build something that community
would use incorporating the other relevant existing standards. We have a
paper accepted in MTSR 2017 where we have detailed the issues, our
objectives and the tasks. We will share this paper within the group shortly.
With regards,
Biswanath
On 13-Oct-2017 2:48 PM, “starred” <***@***.***
> wr! ote:
Dear all,
I was going through the spreadsheet in order to put my interests and a
question came to my mind.
I’m sorry I was not in Montreal and thus, having missed the discussion, this
question might sound very trivial, apologies in case.
How do these tasks relate with existing standards? My question arises as
many tasks could be rethought in terms of facilitating the dissemination
(and the application) of existing standards, or at least contributing
to/improving/discussing critical parts these standards, more than creating
new ones (at least, so it seems by reading the description of these tasks).
Just an example:
Ontology Metadata Standard: This consists in developing together a new
ontology metadata standard that can be used to semantically describe
ontologies/vocabularies/terminologies wherever they are.
Though the short description should not necessarily include references and
examples, at the same time its phrasing hardly suggests the reader that
there is any awareness (I know there is, obviously) nor any will to consider
the already significant number of existing metadata standards, such as:
Ontologies
VOAF: http://lov.okfn.org/vocommons/voaf/
Datasets in general
VoID: http://www.w3.org/TR/void/
LIME:
http://www.w3.org/2016/05/ontolex/#metadata-lime
DCAT: https://www.dcat.org/
The DCAT application profile for data portals (DCAT-AP) and the various
country-specific application profiles DCAT-AP-xx
ADMS: http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-adms/
And also the Ontology Marketplace, strictly connected to the above, is not
clear on that.
Is there anywhere a wider perspective on these tasks so that one could get a
more precise idea about their interest/possibility to contribute?
Again, sorry in advance if I missed anything that should make this more
evident to me,
Thanks!
Armando
From: simon.cox=***@***.***-groups.org
[mailto:simon.cox =***@***.***-groups.org
]On Behalf Of simon.cox
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 12:40 AM
To: ***@***.***-groups.org

Subject: [vocabulary_services] Next steps – formation of task groups
Dear VSSIG members
Thanks all for interest in the RDA Vocabulary and Semantic Services Interest
Group

[0], and particularly to those who attended therecent f2f meeting in
Montreal
Our cunning plan to steal some extra time from the following break
unfortunately foundered on the compulsory seating arrangements at lunch.
However, while we did not bottom-out all the actions we had planned for that
meeting, we did set up a framework for next steps, which we would now like
to proceed with.
A shared spreadsheet was made available for members to describe tasks and
nominate themselves as participants or leaders

o1yWI7K8/> [2]. Since all VSSIG activities are ‘voluntary’ (i.e. supported
by our home organizations) we can only realistically proceed on those
activities where there is enough interest, and where someone has offered to
lead or coordinate. Five activities currently meet this threshold, each with
a leader and a new Slack Channel
[3] as noted:
1. Strategies for aggregating vocabularies – Yann Le Franc
-#tg-search-aggregate

2. Vocabulary API White paper – Arthur Smith -#tg-vocab-api

3. Ontology metadata standard – Clement Jonquet -#tg-ontology-metadata

4. Governance: Requesting changes – John Graybeal -#tg-change-requests

5. Strategies for selecting from vocabularies – John Graybeal
-#tg-term-selection

Numbers are still not large for any of these, and there are a couple of
proposals that do not have a nominated leader. So first we would like to
encourage anyone who has an interest in any of the tasks to think about
whether they could participate, and if so add their name to the sheet [2].
Next we request that the task leads consider how they want to proceed, and
reach out to the other members of the group to schedule some activities. The
Slack channels mentioned above have been set up [3], each having initial
members according to the names on the sheet.
Please note that anyone who is a member of thevocabulary-services Slack
workspace
may join any of the open channels to follow the discussions on any of these
topics.
Looking forward to some busy-ness folks!
Simon, Adam, Yann, John
[0] https://www.rd-alliance.org/groups/vocabulary-services-interest-group
[1]
https://www.rd-alliance.org/ig-vocabulary-services-rda-10th-plenary-meeting
[2]
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gQ5FK7LXmdE5VdXMnDBP8uSJ3Ca-B5Mq…
1yWI7K8/
[3] Reminder – we are using Slack as the primary comms mechanism for VSSIG.
If you are not yet a member, please contact one of the chairs and they will
add you.
https://vocabulary-services.slack.com/messages
Simon J D Cox
Research Scientist
Environmental Informatics
CSIRO Land and Water
E ***@***.*** +61 3 9545 2365M +61 403
302 672
Mail: Private Bag 10, Clayton South, Vic 3169
Visit:Central Reception,Research Way, Clayton, Vic 3168
Deliver:Gate 3, Normanby Road, Clayton, Vic 3168
people.csiro.au/Simon-Cox
orcid.org/0000-0002-3884-3420
researchgate.net/profile/Simon_Cox3

github.com/dr-shorthair
lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/agents/Simon%20Cox

@dr_shorthair
https://xkcd.com/1810/
PLEASE NOTE
The information contained in this email may be confidential or privileged.
Any unauthorised use or disclosure is prohibited. If you have received this
email in error, please delete it immediately and notify the sender by return
email. Thank you. To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO does not represent,
warrant and/or guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been
maintained or that the communication is free of errors, virus, interception
or interference.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
—
Full post:
https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/vocabulary-services-interest-group/pos…
xt-steps-formation-task-groups
Manage my subscriptions: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post:
https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/57813

[Clement Jonquet]

I will be interested in participating.

 

 

Dr. Clement JONQUET  –  PhD in Informatics  –  Assistant Professor
University of Montpellier

Coordinator of the SIFR and AgroPortal projects

Visiting scholar, Stanford University (EU Marie Curie fellow)

 

jonquet@lirmm.fr

http://www.lirmm.fr/~jonquet

 

@Montpellier : +33/4 67 14 97 43

@Stanford       : +1 650 723 6725

[Clement Jonquet]

Hi all,
On this track: Esther and me had been writing a few line about the wheat slice in AgroPortal that we will copy/paste soon in a shared doc.
Maybe we should use the GODAN Summit and RDA P8 to discuss this in a side meeting 😉
I am in NY, who’s in Denver ?
Clement
De : michael.alaux=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] De la part de malaux
Envoyé : jeudi 11 août 2016 09:11
À : ***@***.***-groups.org
Objet : Re: [rda-wdinterop-wg] Considering submitting WDI results for journal publication ?
Hello Clément and everyone,
I am also in favour of publishing the outputs in a journal.
I started to add few sentences in the google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1S4v9XHmIfRL-9jH-g9-yPwPrqVv911nLcvAU…
Best regards
Michael
Le 28/07/2016 à 10:03, vprot a écrit :
Hi Laurel,
Thank you for sharing the GDocs; I believe that they could help us build a first draft quickly. I suggest that we use the first GDoc for collaborative editing/contributing and the second one as a source of information.
If you agree with my proposal, I invite everyone to contribute to the authoring of the paper whenever he/she has some time to work on that, using the first GDoc (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1S4v9XHmIfRL-9jH-g9-yPwPrqVv911nLcvAU… ). There is no rush (as there is no deadline for the submission), so it is up to anyone to find some time for that. I will try to start building on that within August, while everyone else will be on holidays (more or less).
Best regards,
Vassilis
—
Full post: https://rd-alliance.org/group/wheat-data-interoperability-wg/post/consid…
Manage my subscriptions: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/53248
—

Michael Alaux
Deputy leader: Information System and Data Integration team
Bioinformatics project manager: Wheat
URGI
INRA Centre de Versailles, Bat 18, RD 10 Route de Saint-Cyr
78026 Versailles FRANCE
Tel. : +33 (0)1 30 83 34 23

[Clement Jonquet]

Hello all,
I just did a few comments and addons to the document with a bit more commitments for AgroPortal. Few corrections here and there. And a few notes about possible AgroHackathons.
Overall, the doc look good.
Clement
De : sophie.aubin=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] De la part de Sophie Aubin
Envoyé : lundi 22 août 2016 05:39
À : ***@***.***-groups.org; Caracciolo, Caterina (OPCC) ; Panagiotis Zervas

Objet : [rda-agrisemantics-wg] Case Statement
Dear all,
The Case Statement will be sent to the review process on September 1st, as agreed during our last WG call (see minutes: http://bit.ly/2921gR2).
This email is a kind reminder to contribute to the online document: http://bit.ly/2awVXFz. Many thanks to those who already have.
Input from WG members is more than welcome, particularly on the “Value Proposition” and “Adoption Plan” sections that are still a little weak. Please take some minutes to think about it and suggest content by Monday, 29th.
As there is no call scheduled before sending the Case Statement, also feel free to comment and discuss online or through the present mailing list.
Best regards,
Sophie, Caterina & Panos

[Clement Jonquet]

Hi all,
Great to see the idea is shared, and thanks for the suggestions and preliminary work.
Why not going for F1000, it sounds a bit more life sciences / bio that agro, but indeed there is the OKAD channel. We just have to be sure the paper will be reviewed otherwise, it is just a listed there and I don’t know when someone can call it “published”.
Bye all and indeed have great vacations.
Clement
De : edzale=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] De la part de edzale
Envoyé : mercredi 27 juillet 2016 02:37
À : ***@***.***-groups.org
Objet : Re: [rda-wdinterop-wg] Considering submitting WDI results for journal publication ?
Hi Clement and Everyone,
I am of course in favour of publishing the outputs in a journal. To second Alex’s opinion, I think it could be quite brief and point towards the website which is meant to contain the updated guidelines.
Please find enclosed a very rough draft which could be a starting point. Feel free to throw it away. Please note that starting tomorrow evening, I will be on vacation. Do not hesitate to go forward in the meanwhile.
All the best,
Esther
Le 27/07/2016 à 10:08, SridharGutam a écrit :
Hi everyone…
Its a very good idea to go with F1000…. is there anything I can contribute from my side for the work/publication??
Thanks
Sridhar
Sridhar Gutam, PhD, ARS
Senior Scientist (Plant Physiology) ｜ ​Associate Editor, DOAJ
​​
｜ Convener, Open Access India
ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region
Research Centre Ranchi
Tata Road, Rajaulatu Post, Plandu, Ranchi 834010, Jharkhand, India
Phone: +91-651-2260141 ｜ Fax: +91-651-2260101 ｜ Mobile:+91-9005760036/8005346136
Skype: sridhar.gutam ｜ Twitter: @SridharGutam
Official Email: ***@***.***
Scholarship ｜ Impact ｜ Citations
ICAR RCER is a constituent establishment of ICAR
Follow ICAR RCER on Facebook and Twitter
On 27 July 2016 at 13:30, vprot wrote:
You can find more information on the review and publication process of F1000 at http://f1000research.com/about
And please count me in for this effort; even though I may not be in the position to lead the effort, I would be more than happy to contribute bits and pieces to the structure and content of the publication, do the proofreading etc. 🙂
Best regards,
Vassilis
From: pierre.larmande=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:pierre.larmande =***@***.***-groups.org ] On Behalf Of larmande
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 10:55 AM
To: subirats ; Wheat Data Interoperability WG
Cc: alexwhan ; Clement Jonquet ; ***@***.*** ; ***@***.***
Subject: Re: [rda-wdinterop-wg] Considering submitting WDI results for journal publication ?
I forgot to mention that the publication process is different in F1000.
Submitted manuscripts are directly published on the web site, then there is an open review.
Pierre
Le 27 juil. 2016 à 09:48, subirats a écrit :
I second the idea of submitting to F1000Research!
From: pierre.larmande=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] On Behalf Of larmande
Sent: 27 July 2016 09:34
To: alexwhan ; Wheat Data Interoperability WG
Cc: Clement Jonquet ; ***@***.*** ; ***@***.***
Subject: Re: [rda-wdinterop-wg] Considering submitting WDI results for journal publication ?
Dear All,
indeed this is an important step that we should overcome.
I suggested to Ester few weeks ago submitting at http://f1000research.com/. I think the journal has a good audience, remember some RDA Groups already published there furthermore it have channel such as http://f1000research.com/channels/okad or http://f1000research.com/channels/elixir-reports where we could adress the results.
Best
Pierre.
Le 27 juil. 2016 à 01:32, alexwhan < ***@***.***> a écrit :
I think this is a very important conclusion to the work that was put in – somebody needs to put their hand up to lead it and make it happen!
In my opinion it could be really quite a brief paper, and aside from having something tangible to remain in the literature, it will give another opportunity to point researchers towards the guidelines.
Alex.
– Show quoted text -From: jonquet=***@***.***-groups.org [ mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] On Behalf Of jonquet
Sent: Wednesday, 27 July 2016 4:16 AM
To: ***@***.***; ‘FULSS, Richard Allan James (CIMMYT)’ < ***@***.***>; Wheat Data Interoperability WG < ***@***.***-groups.org>
Subject: [rda-wdinterop-wg] Considering submitting WDI results for journal publication ?
Hi all,
I take this middle-summer-cool-down opportunity to raise by email a question… about publishing the results of the WDI group.
It has been discussed a couple of time informally but I don’t know if some did took a decision.
Should we consider submitting the results of the WDI group for journal publicati on ?
There have been deliverables, products, and guidelines. RDA is made for making people meet and work, but what stays over time (and are important for evaluation) are journal publications.
I know a bunch of countries/organizations that will not restraint themselves as we do when considering publishing 😉
We should not restrict ourselves either.
Esther, Richard, what do you think?
Clement
PS: In case everyone is in vacation … mid next week for me…; I will resume the thread in September !
Dr. Clement JONQUET – PhD in Informatics – Assistant Professor
University of Montpellier
Coordinator of the SIFR and AgroPortal projects
Visiting scholar, Stanford University (EU Marie Curie fellow)
***@***.***
http://www.lirmm.fr/~jonquet
@Montpellier : +33/4 67 14 97 43
@Stanford : +1 650 723 6725
—
Full post: https://rd-alliance.org/group/wheat-data-interoperability-wg/post/consid…
Manage my subscriptions: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/53248
—
Full post: https://rd-alliance.org/group/wheat-data-interoperability-wg/post/consid…
Manage my subscriptions: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/53248
Αποποίηση ευθυνών / Disclaimer
—
Full post: https://rd-alliance.org/group/wheat-data-interoperability-wg/post/consid…
Manage my subscriptions: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/53248
—
Full post: https://rd-alliance.org/group/wheat-data-interoperability-wg/post/consid…
Manage my subscriptions: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/53248

[Clement Jonquet]

July 20th I am back on PDT time.
I guess the default time zone is CET. Sophie, could you add the 17-18h slot
(this will be 8am for me) but that’s the only one I can make.
Others from outside EU ?
If not… hum it means we need to talk a bit more about our WG worldwide 😉
Clement
—–Message d’origine—–
De : sophie.aubin=***@***.***-groups.org
[mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] De la part de Sophie
Aubin
Envoyé : lundi 27 juin 2016 15:30
À : ***@***.***-groups.org
Cc : Caracciolo, Caterina (OPCC)
Objet : [rda-agrisemantics-wg] last call minutes + next call
Dear all,
In the shared RDA_Agrisemantics folder, you can find the minutes of our last
call on Friday, 24th:http://bit.ly/2921gR2
As for our next meeting, please indicate your availability in the Doodle
poll:http://bit.ly/28YqtcQ Candidate dates are in the week of Mon July 18th.
We made our best to take into account the variety of your respective
locations.
Looking forward to talking to you all!
Kind regards
Sophie & Caterina
—
Full post:
https://rd-alliance.org/group/agrisemantics-wg/post/last-call-minutes-ne…
all
Manage my subscriptions: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post:
https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/52973

[Clement Jonquet]

Hi all,
Somehow we should come up with a plan.
Check out the new Research data repository interoperability WG, they have suggested plan on this web page:
https://rd-alliance.org/group/research-data-repository-interoperability-…
Should we work on something like that ?
Plan to meet and kick off the WG (I mean the official months) at RDA P8 ?
Also, is there a precise positioning to other RDA WG that have been (or need to be )done ?
Clement
De : dmadalli=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] De la part de dmadalli
Envoyé : vendredi 13 mai 2016 11:14
À : Agrisemantics WG
Objet : [rda-agrisemantics-wg] Update
Dear Members
Since its been a while since the last communication here thought an update is called for.
I woudl like to report that
1
Dear Members
Since its been a while since the last communication here I thought an update is called for.
I would like to report that:
1. Caterina Caracciolo and Sophie Aubin have taken over as chairs of the RDA Agrisemantics working group.
2. Devika Madalli [I] will co-ordinate communication here in this forum
3. Caterina, Sophie and myself discussed a bit in these days, to short list topics which could be part of the proposal for setting up a RDA working group on Agrisemantics. The tentative topics proposed in the discussion are as follows:
a. Compare alternative approaches to organizing knowledge structures that exist at present. Output of the working group would be guidelines to suggest pros and cons of the two approach and suggest when one is to be preferred over the other. Including comments of needed infrastructure.
b. Compare different levels of centralization: gacs vs agroportal. [for example] Output of the working group would be an analysis of pros and cons of popular approaches and suggestions for when to use one over the other. Including comments of needed infrastructure.
c. Connection of semantic structures and data. Thesauri, ontologies and models. Output of the working group could be a state of art of effort towards semantics for data and if possible recommend or come up with a reference model
d. Discussion on treatment of units of measurements and their harmonization. Example/continuation of the work done in the Wheat WG?
e. Concept mapping: automated, assisted, manual approaches. Output of the working group would be an analysis of pros and cons of the three approaches and suggestions for when to use one over the other.
There is a ‘Open Harvest’ workshop being organized at Chania, Greece on May 18-19. We expect lead experts to be present. hence our thought is present our preliminary ideas to experts at Open Harvest workshop informally [at the break times] to collect more inputs, views and opinions. so I will report more after the Chania workshop
Meanwhile I encourage you all, members, to comment, contribute to ideas that you think should be part of a proposal to stup RDA working group on Agrisemantics.
Have a great weekend!
Caio
Devika
—
Full post: https://rd-alliance.org/group/agrisemantics-wg/post/update
Manage my subscriptions: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/52362

[Author]

Replies