Thursday, January 10, 2019, 10 AM US Eastern Time

Connection Info

Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://duraspace.zoom.us/j/952326581

Or iPhone one-tap :
    US: +16468769923,,952326581#  or +16699006833,,952326581# 
Or Telephone:
    Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): 
        US: +1 646 876 9923  or +1 669 900 6833  or +1 408 638 0968 
    Meeting ID: 952 326 581
    International numbers available: https://duraspace.zoom.us/zoomconference?m=UwwKqz4RbGAsBAZgCE9XMorMuL0CeV4Q
more details»  copy to my calendar

Attendees

...

Google Doc: http://bit.ly/2TGgvBA

Attendees

...

• Anna Kasprzik
• Ralph O'Flinn
• Muhammad Javed Brian Lowe
• Violeta Ilik
• Brian Lowe
• Sonja Schulze
• Christian Hauschke
• Mike Conlon
• Marijane White
  
• Don ElsborgDamaris Murry

Agenda

1. Updates, intros, review agenda
2. Ontology licensesIdentifierslicenses  See http://bit.ly/2TDpqnl
3. Change Process – draft here: http://bit.ly/2TAaqXg
4. Identifiers – proposal is here:  http://bit.ly/2wEyy17  
   1. Some background from RDA is here:  https://www.rd-alliance.org/system/files/PID-report_v6.1_2017-12-13_final.pdf
   2. discusiondiscussion
   3. next steps
5. December 3 sprint
   1. New subClasses for items asserted to be skos:Concept.  

      Jira
      server DuraSpace JIRA serverId c815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5 key VIVO-1287

   2. Administrative Unit 

      Jira
      server DuraSpace JIRA serverId c815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5 key VIVO-1652

      vitro:editing 

      Jira
      server DuraSpace JIRA serverId c815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5 key VIVO-1528

6. Future agenda items
   1. Language skills
   2. Projects and Grants
   3. Application ontology
   4. Research object

Notes

Welcome to the Interest Group!

• Being an interest group means we’re no longer focused on specific tasks/goals

• If we identify specific work/projects that need to be done, we would spin off a task force.

• The Identifiers project is a candidate for a task force.

Ontology License updates:

Ralph: Should VIVO have its own ontology? Or bring in the best pieces and then licensing become clear cut??

Mike: Table it for now. May be 2 to 5 year idea.

May be a good topic for the conference panel? Full spectrum -- reuse nothing, reuse everything (no ontology)

Mike: Work is to identify the license of each ontology.

Marijane: We cannot license the way we want if there is no existing license. +1

Violeta: Dublin Core metadata is responsible for BIBO. They have not responded yet for my questions.

Mike: We are using many ontologies. If one of them has restrictive license (and we are using a few terms), we could get rid of that ontology.

Identifier:

Mike: RDA report raised good points regarding what PID are and what kinds of them there are, all are mentioned in the document.

https://www.rd-alliance.org/system/files/PID-report_v6.1_2017-12-13_final.pdf

VIVO-1662 Issue:

https://jira.duraspace.org/browse/VIVO-1662?src=confmacro

Mike: If we have relationship with bibo group, we may work together to update bibo ontology.

Data issues: How much software should help the data managers. We have annotations that help software.

We mention in ontology that an entity is a string (and perhaps a language tag), and in annotation we suggest that it should be edited with an HTML editor. Graham considers annotations as suggestions.

Ontology management issues: Current process allows a committer and an ontologist to approve a domain ontology pull request.  Seems thin.

We are operating on good faith.  Other ontologists should be brought in.  Issues should be discussed with the interest group.

Brian:  We should finish the change process we drafted.

Mike:  Yes. We have scoring of issues and we have a draft process.  Need to socialize the process with the rest of the community, resulting in a recorded process.

Decision: cancel the pull request by closing it

Action items:

...

Close the pull request

...

Ontology licensing -- everyone feel free to pitch in

Change process

• We never shared this with the rest of the VIVO community

• Is it stale, given the active developer IG?

• Need to review in ontology meeting

• Ontology and annotation as “configuration” of the application

• People are concerned about ontologies.  Le't ask them via Slack poll.  Christian volunteered to do this.

• Marijane as a guest speaker at development regarding ontology

• Steps for change process

• Review here

• Discuss/review with developers -- MJW offered to present to developers

• Discuss review with governance

Identifiers

• Several different use cases (see document)

• Don - with identifiers as object properties, can we assign attributes to them that describe their nature. For example does the target url of the identifier render rdf? This might allow developers to code against it.

• Mike - Yes.  Must be mindful to separate actual real world attributes vs. display/developer type of attributes (annotations)

• Following discussion, the group agreed to prioritize the change management process and continue to discuss the need for changing identifiers.

Open tickets

• Jira 1287 -- Assigning new parent classes to five entities currently with parent class skos:Concept.  The result is an application that appears to work as before, but no longer lists these entities in search results for concepts (a highly desirable operational result). Need reviewers.  Don Elsborg offered to review

• Jira 1612 - what is an AdministrativeUnit - lot’s of discussion around this. Christian noted this is very important to German academic institutions.  Zentrale Einheiten.

• Is this distinguishable from Administrative Department (which also has not yet been added to VIVO, but perhaps is much clearer such as IT, Purchasing, Office of the President.  VIVO currently has Department with sub-class AcademicDepartment, but no corresponding subclass AdministrativeDepartment.

• Individuals in the AdministrativeUnit class are intended to be “place holders” on org charts -- in some org charts we need to be able to say “these orgs are part of that administrative unit and that administrative unit is part of something else” even when the administrative unit has little that indicates it *is* as organization -- no legal standing, no leader, no budget, no employees.  What *is* such a thing.

• Can we have some guidelines regarding when we might add new sub-classes?

• “Administrative Unit” is heavily loaded terminology and might not be a good choice for this class.

• Distinguish from Virtual organization (or not?).  A virtual organization is often used to describe adhoc collections of people who come together for research purposes.  See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_organization

Action Items

1. In Progress or Review Ontology Issues

...