Thursday, January 23, 2020, 10 AM US Eastern Time

Connection Info

To join the online meeting:


  1. Violeta Ilik 
  2. Brian Lowe  
  3. Christian Hauschke 
  4. Mike Conlon


Ontology Interest Group Google Folder

Google Doc for meeting notes:


  1. Possible ontology events
    1. US2TS, March 9-11, North Carolina State University, Raleigh.  Chris Mungall, Juan Sequada, Jim Hendler
    2. Graph conference, May 5-7, Columbia University
    3. CRIS2020, June 17-20, Limassol, Cyprus
    4. US VIVO event, October? no update yet
    5. Force11 October 19-21, San Sebastien, Spain. Simon will be there.
    6. SWIB, November 25-27, Bonn
    7. Fall CNI, December 14-15, Washington
    8. Virtual meeting – an all-day meeting.  
  2. Language Ontology draft. This draft was created in keeping with Early Thoughts on Representing Languages and Language Capabilities
    1. Overview
    2. Next steps?


  1. SWIB "get a room" . Workshop day is November 25.  VIVO "workshop". Christian to organize. Two slots.  9-12 the first,  and the following day.  US Thanksgiving is November 26.
  2. Lightning Talk – at US2TS.
  3. Talk proposal at Knowledge Graph.
  4. Limassol is close for Brian.  Also Hamburg.
  5. Virtual meeting – really work together, a schedule.
    1. One or two topics
    2. Target audience – those interested in ontologies in scholarship
    3. Invite domain experts.  Open to everyone, focused on topics.
    4. Mike will create a draft agenda and check on LYRASIS Zoom rooms (two).  Four hours.  8-12 US Eastern time. 
  6. Language Ontology
    1. Can there be a "universal english" individual that all individuals and works can be associated with?  Yes, but.  This precludes making assertions about the language of the work or the person.  The same SPARQL queries can be used to find people who speak english whether there are individual english for each person, or an individual english used for all works in a particular library.  Both appear to be valid implementations.
    2. Is there an issue with tying the language capability to an individual rather than a class?  Some complexity here and we will need more work, we suspect. 
    3. Is there an issue with subclassing a language in the context of a language capability.  Yes, certainly.  The capability was asserted to a particular individual.
    4. Is there a concern with moving this repository to VIVO community for further work and sharing it with others. No – the group had no concerns.

Action Items

  • No labels