[OSGeo-Standards] [Board] glossary discussion on osgeo-standards ....
Ronald Tse
tse at ribose.com
Wed Nov 13 22:10:58 PST 2019
Hi Nicholas,
Thank you for the interest in the Lexicon Committee, and I would strongly support your nomination to join.
It is interesting to learn of your work with ISO 19160 especially since we currently lead ISO 19160-6 at ISO/TC 211. The OSGeo Geolexica site, which is in development (https://osgeodev.geolexica.org/) intends to support the Content Negotiation by profile standard as well as providing SKOS in JSON-LD form.
Kind regards,
Ron
_____________________________________
Ronald Tse
Ribose Inc.
On Nov 7, 2019, at 6:04 PM, Nicholas Car <nicholas.car at surroundaustralia.com<mailto:nicholas.car at surroundaustralia.com>> wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to nominate to join the Lexicon Committee.
Some of you will be familiar with my previous geo- standards work at organisations such as Geoscience Australia and now the Geological Survey of Queensland. I’ve also worked on Semantic Web, vocabulary and spatial services and standards for about a decade at CSIRO, Australia’s federal government research agency.
Currently I’m working on spatial Semantic Web projects such as the Location Index [1], a better Semantic Web version of ISO19160, the ISO addressing standard [2], and spatial/geo vocabulary publication regimes, such as the Place Names Gazetteer of Australia. These all involve many vocabularies and terms. Part of my current project’s work is to extend two spatial cataloguing tools you surely all know well, GeoNetwork & CKAN, to enable them to better utilise formal vocabularies and also to increase their ability to play by Semantic Web protocols, such as the new Content Negotiation by profile [3]. I’ve also built both ontology and vocabulary publication and management tools, e.g. VocPrez [4] and published 50+ formal vocabularies for various government agencies and companies. E.g. the G-NAF codes [5]. I also currently co-chair, and am the main publication facilitator of, the Australian Government Linked Data Working Group [6] that maintains persistent identifiers and publishes Semantic Web datasets, ontologies and vocabularies.
Due to these experiences and current work, I think I could make useful contributions to this committee as you seek to “develop consistent terminology between OSGeo projects”.
Thanks,
Nick
Nicholas Car
Data Systems Architect
at SURROUND Australia Pty Ltd
PO Box 86, Mawson Canberra, 2607 Australia
https://surroundaustralia.com<https://surroundaustralia.com/>
nicholas.car at surroundaustralia.com<mailto:nicholas.car at surroundaustralia.com>
+61 477 560 177
Enhancing Intelligence Within Organisations
Delivering evidence that connects decisions to outcomes
[1] http://locationindex.org<http://locationindex.org/>
[2] http://www.linked.data.gov.au/def/iso19160-1-address/
[3] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/connegp/
[4] http://www.linked.data.gov.au/, see it in action https://vocabs.gsq.digital/
[5] https://gnafld.net/def/gnaf/code/AddressTypes
[6] http://www.linked.data.gov.au/
From: Standards <standards-bounces at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:standards-bounces at lists.osgeo.org>> on behalf of Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com<mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>>
Date: Thursday, 7 November 2019 at 8:10 am
To: Helena Mitasova <hmitaso at ncsu.edu<mailto:hmitaso at ncsu.edu>>
Cc: "standards at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:standards at lists.osgeo.org>" <standards at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:standards at lists.osgeo.org>>, Board <board at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:board at lists.osgeo.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Standards] [Board] glossary discussion on osgeo-standards ....
Thanks for the research Helena,
It sounds like an OSGeo Special Interest Group will address our Lexicon Committee requirements. Unless there are any objections, I propose to push forward with our agenda of setting up an email list, building a committee, selecting a chair, and getting some work done.
If you have any objections, please respond ASAP, ideally within the next 48 hours.
--
Further to Helena's research:
* Yes, I'd suggest special interest groups should be listed on the website.
* I found this page: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Interest_Groups which I'd suggest should be made official by the board. It currently states: "This page documents the current dicsussion and has not yet been approved as official OSGeo policy!"
* The OSGeo Standards Committee should get a page somewhere. I'm pretty sure it had one before, but I can't find it now.
On 2/11/19 1:22 pm, Helena Mitasova wrote:
I looked into this a little bit and I did not find any Standards committee here
https://www.osgeo.org/about/committees/
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Main_Page
https://www.osgeo.org/about/board/
But I found OSGeo Standards special interest group and associated mailing list:
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Special-Interest-Groups-f5179645.html
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/OSGeo-Standards-f5012448.html
Interestingly enough, I could not find the special interest groups on the new website - is it something that should be added there?
I don’t think that board vote is needed to establish a special interest group and mailing list,
But the board can voice support and endorsement - I would like to voice my support here if the special interest group is the way to go.
Cameron, if you think that it would be better to have Lexicon as an official OSGeo committee (with everything that comes with it, see
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines), then apparently, the board needs to vote to approve the committee chair
according to the guidelines (which I believe are partially based on the bylaws).
I hope this clarifies the process somewhat and cameron please let us know which way you would like to go,
Thanks a lot for the initiative, Helena
On Nov 1, 2019, at 9:13 PM, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com<mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>> wrote:
Astroidex, Kalxas, Delawen, Helena, OSGeo Board,
Do my answers below address your questions re setting up an OSGeo Lexicon committee?
Within the next few weeks I'm hoping to reach out to those from the OSGeo community who have provided glossaries and are likely to be interested in joining a Lexicon committee. From that committee we can elect a chair.
I'm prefer to have the OSGeo Board's blessing before progressing further. Is that something you'd be prepared to provide?
Cheers, Cameron
On 30/10/19 10:17 am, Cameron Shorter wrote:
Hi Angelos, board,
That is a good question. Working the lexicon community within the standards committee is something we should consider. While I wouldn't want to rule it out as an option, I'd vote -0 for it.
My reasoning:
* The lexicon committee is only focusing on one very narrow use case within the greater OSGeo/Standards space.
* The standards committee has a very board focus across all standards related use cases. In particular, it has focused on managing the relationship between OSGeo and OGC.
* The lexicon committee will be very noisy within this very specific lexicon use case. People interested in general standards will be swapped with emails and I predict we will very quickly kill off any other standards related conversations due to the noise.
* The standards committee is relatively quiet, and it could be argued that we could consider retiring the standards committee and restart it as a lexicon committee. I don't think this is the case. I think the standards committee still has meaning and purpose.
For these reasons, I believe the Lexicon and Standards committees should be kept separate.
For my next steps, I'm hoping to follow this process:
1. Get endorsement from the board.
2. Create a new lexicon at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:lexicon at lists.osgeo.org> email list
3. Reach out to OSGeo projects and invite them to join the list and participate in a committee
4. Boostrap a lexicon committee
5. Committee members to vote for a committee chair
6. Start getting serious about the work we are doing.
I'm hoping that the board can discuss via email, ask questions which I'll answer, then we can set up a motion and help us move through the steps above.
Warm regards, Cameron
For reference, I've copied comments from the board meeting:
http://irclogs.geoapt.com/osgeo/%23osgeo.2019-10-28.log
16:22:49
helena_:
#7 Lexicon committee
16:23:13
helena_:
they keep changing the name but it is an important initiative
16:23:37
astroidex:
just a question. Could it be part of one existing committee?
16:23:47
delawen:
(I'm back did I miss any voting?)
16:23:50
kalxas:
I am wondering why this has to be a separate committee from standards
16:24:03
astroidex:
same for me
16:24:06
kalxas:
delawen, no :)
16:24:19
astroidex:
it could be part of education
16:24:38
delawen:
if they feel they have enough work to be isolated... see no reason why not
16:24:43
astroidex:
https://www.osgeo.org/about/committees/
16:24:44
sigq:
Title: Committees - OSGeo (at www.osgeo.org<http://www.osgeo.org/>)
16:24:44
kalxas:
given that OGC and ISO are involved, I think it should be standards
16:24:53
delawen:
but I would give them some time to do stuff before making them official
16:25:41
delawen:
If you think it should be standards, we can answer them that
16:25:41
kalxas:
also, we do need a chair to approve them, right?
16:26:00
helena_:
Angelos - can you please get bcak to Cameron with suggestion from the board to make it part of standards?
16:26:25
astroidex:
good idea
16:26:44
kalxas:
yes, I can follow up
On Wed, 30 Oct 2019 at 02:30, Angelos Tzotsos <gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com<mailto:gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Cameron,
The formation of the lexicon committee was discussed during the board
meeting yesterday.
One question that came up is: what is the reason this work cannot be
done under the standards committee, since this involves members from
OSGeo, OGC and ISO?
Regards,
Angelos
On 10/24/19 12:16 AM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> Angelos,
>
> We haven't discussed selecting a chair of the committee yet, but I
> will be suggesting Reese and/or Ron as we bootstrap this committee.
> They both have been been very active in setting up this initiative and
> come with lots of experience.
>
> On 22/10/19 10:47 pm, Victoria Rautenbach wrote:
>> Dear All
>>
>> This is a great initiative, thank you Cameron and Reese. I fully
>> support this initiative and working with the ISO/TC 211 TMG on their
>> mature terminology database.
>>
>> Reese, will be great to work with you again!
>>
>> Regards
>> Victoria
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 9:52 AM Angelos Tzotsos
>> <gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com<mailto:gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> Hi Cameron,
>>>
>>> Have you decided on a committee chair?
>>> Who will be the point of contact for the board?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Angelos
>>>
>>> On 10/21/19 8:32 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>
>>> OSGeo Board,
>>>
>>> On behalf of Ron, Reese and myself, I've added an item to the board
>>> agenda requested the board's approval for the setting up of an OSGeo
>>> Lexicon Committee. Unfortunately none of us will be awake during
>>> this meeting so will not be in a position to discuss the proposal in
>>> person. Hopefully if you have any questions you can raise them
>>> before hand in this email thread.
>>>
>>> We have started a wiki page for the committee here:
>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Lexicon_Committee
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance, Cameron
>>>
>>> On 19/10/19 4:15 am, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Angelos, the other end of the day would probably be easier. I think
>>> this link shows board locations along with Ron (Hong Kong) and Reese
>>> (Tokyo).
>>>
>>> https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingtime.html?year=2019&month=10&day=20&p1=240&p2=248&p3=102&p4=269&p5=250&p6=26&p7=37&p8=286&p9=734
>>> <https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingtime.html?year=2019&month=10&day=19&p1=240&p2=248&p3=102&p4=269&p5=250&p6=26&p7=37&p8=286&p9=734>
>>>
>>>
>>> Does anyone else from the OSGeo board have an opinion on this
>>> proposal and wish to share it? We could make the meeting
>>> coordination easier if we narrow participation to only those with an
>>> interest and an opinion.
>>>
>>> On 18/10/19 8:16 pm, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> In that case we should probably arrange a specific call for this topic.
>>> I think the only working timeslot would be around 20:00-22:00 UTC
>>>
>>> On 10/17/19 9:24 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>
>>> Angelos, the board meeting is 3am for me. The 3 of us involved are
>>> in this Asian/Australia timezone.
>>>
>>> Reese, we can get you set up with IRC (Internet Chat Relay) quite
>>> easily. It is text based only. Quickest way to get started is with
>>> the web client: https://webchat.freenode.net/
>>>
>>> On 17/10/19 10:19 pm, rplews at tc211tmg.org<mailto:rplews at tc211tmg.org>wrote:
>>>
>>> hello Angelos, thank you for the invitation, two issues for me,
>>> local time is 1am and i have never done Internet Relay Chat. i can
>>> do skype or zoom. if you have another time/date let me know. sorry
>>> about this time.
>>> reese
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From:
>>> "Angelos Tzotsos" <gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com<mailto:gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com>>
>>>
>>> To:
>>> "Cameron Shorter" <cameron.shorter at gmail.com<mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>>,
>>> <standards at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:standards at lists.osgeo.org>>, "board at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:board at lists.osgeo.org>"
>>> <board at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:board at lists.osgeo.org>>, "OSGeo Discussions" <discuss at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:discuss at lists.osgeo.org>>
>>> Cc:
>>> "Reese Plews" <rplews at gmail.com<mailto:rplews at gmail.com>>
>>> Sent:
>>> Thu, 17 Oct 2019 12:14:37 +0300
>>> Subject:
>>> Re: [OSGeo-Standards] [Board] glossary discussion on
>>> osgeo-standards ....
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Would someone be available to join our next board meeting to
>>> discuss this issue?
>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2019-10-28
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Angelos
>>>
>>> On 10/15/19 9:52 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>
>>> OSGeo Board, OSGeo Discuss,
>>>
>>> I'd like to introduce you to this proposal that Ron and Reese
>>> have been developing on the OSGeo Standards email list, which
>>> I think should fit under the legal structure of an OSGeo
>>> Committee.
>>>
>>> I have vague recollections that setting up a committee
>>> requires board approval? I've found some old tips on running a
>>> committee here:
>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines
>>>
>>> Comments welcomed.
>>>
>>> On 15/10/19 4:47 pm, Ronald Tse wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Cameron,
>>>
>>> Thank you for the suggestions! I have updated the proposal
>>> to reflect your comments below.
>>>
>>> I would be honored to help with terminology management at
>>> OSGeo. Can’t speak for Reese but with his leadership in
>>> already doing terminology cleanup on Felicity’s sheet, he
>>> seems pretty committed already :-)
>>>
>>> Ron
>>>
>>> ———
>>>
>>> Recommendations for OSGeo terminology management
>>>
>>> 1. Establish a terminology management group in OSGeo.
>>>
>>> ISO/TC 211, IEC Electropedia and OGC all have one for
>>> terminology management. The existence of this group is
>>> crucial to the success of the OSGeo terminology database.
>>> It will play two essential roles:
>>>
>>> a) As the gatekeeper of terms to ensure quality checks of
>>> contributions
>>> b) As the seat of central terminology knowledge for
>>> alignment of terms and concepts. To facilitate the flow of
>>> terminology knowledge to terminology authors and users.
>>>
>>> It would be helpful to involve representation from ISO/TC
>>> 211 and OGC in this group, in order to leverage their
>>> experience in terminology. Such experience will be useful
>>> in situations such as alerting on cross-organization
>>> alignment of concepts or term duplication.
>>>
>>> An email list shall be setup for this group for internal
>>> communication.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2. Establish a terms of reference for terminology
>>> management.
>>>
>>> For the terminology management group, a terms of reference
>>> should be produced so that the steps for approval and data
>>> quality requirements are clear. This should be openly
>>> shared with contributors so they are clear on acceptance
>>> criteria.
>>>
>>> Contributors may propose changes to the terminology
>>> database at any time. The terminology management group
>>> shall discuss and approve or disapprove of the proposal
>>> within a reasonable timeframe. This practice is in-line
>>> with the open source, change-based, rapid iteration
>>> mantra, similar to OpenSSL.
>>>
>>> For releases, the group shall convene periodically, such
>>> as every 4-6 months, to discuss previously decided
>>> proposals, governance or technical issues related to
>>> terminology management.
>>>
>>> The method of submitting change requests shall also be
>>> determined and announced so that contributors understand
>>> the necessary processes and timeline.
>>>
>>>
>>> 3. Establish an online terminology database presence.
>>>
>>> Terminology isn’t useful until people use them, which
>>> means people need to first know they exist and what they
>>> mean. Geolexica is an initiative that currently serves
>>> ISO/TC 211’s terminology management group in making its
>>> multi-lingual geographic information terminology available
>>> on the internet (https://www.geolexica.org<https://www.geolexica.org/>). We propose to
>>> use https://osgeo.geolexica.org/ to serve OSGeo in
>>> managing its terminology database. Geolexica not only
>>> serves human-readable concepts and terms, but also serves
>>> in machine-readable JSON, allowing APIs to directly
>>> consume the content.
>>>
>>> The structure of Geolexica is designed for efficiency with
>>> streamlined management and operations. Terms are stored in
>>> structured data (YAML) files, and are directly deployable
>>> to the website. The website operates according to best
>>> practices, and is served as a static website with dynamic
>>> search functionality. Security and performance have always
>>> been key considerations.
>>>
>>> For terms that originate from other authoritative
>>> terminology databases, such as those from ISO or OGC, a
>>> linkage shall be established from the OSGeo terminology
>>> database back to the source.
>>>
>>>
>>> 4. Use an issue tracker with source code management
>>> functionality as an open communication platform (e.g.
>>> GitHub).
>>>
>>> The issue tracker is used to perform two-way communication
>>> between OSGeo members and the contributors. This requires
>>> every contributor to at least have an account, which helps
>>> minimize spam. The source code management functionality is
>>> used to manage terminology data in a machine-useable way.
>>>
>>> There are generally two types of contributors:
>>>
>>> a) those who suggest changes via textual description, and
>>> b) those who suggest changes but can also format the
>>> desired content in the data format used by the terminology
>>> database.
>>>
>>> People can easily help out with the former in formatting
>>> the changes into a proper data structure change. This
>>> allows the terminology management group to directly
>>> approve, merge and deploy the proposed term modifications
>>> (and creations, deletions), all made effective with a
>>> single click.
>>>
>>>
>>> 5. Allow easy feedback from terminology users.
>>>
>>> To minimize friction in the feedback process, for every
>>> term offered in the OSGeo terminology pages we can offer a
>>> “propose new term” and “propose changes to this term"
>>> buttons. This allows user to directly go to the issue
>>> platform (e.g. GitHub) to make the suggested changes.
>>>
>>> A “contributors guide” document will greatly help these
>>> people make the proper suggestions and have them formatted
>>> correctly.
>>>
>>>
>>> 6. Initial load and data cleanup.
>>>
>>> The initial load of the terms will involve a bulk load
>>> from the cleaned terms and definitions that Felicity has
>>> compiled. Geolexica could easily handle the initial
>>> conversion from table format into the desired structured
>>> data format.
>>>
>>> The cleanup process has already been started by Reese
>>> Plews, convenor of the TMG at ISO/TC 211.
>>>
>>>
>>> _____________________________________
>>>
>>> Ronald Tse
>>> Ribose Inc.
>>>
>>> On Oct 10, 2019, at 3:34 PM, Cameron Shorter
>>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com<mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Ron,
>>>
>>> I really like your proposal. It looks very practical,
>>> should address quality requirements, and should be
>>> relatively light weight to manage. Some
>>> comments/suggestions:
>>>
>>> * You might want to mention the approach to your first
>>> load of terms, which probably should involve a bulk
>>> load from a derivative of the terms that Felicity has
>>> compiled.
>>>
>>> * I suggest we set up an email list to discuss terms.
>>> OSGeo can provide that for us, and I can coordinate
>>> that, once we have agreed on our approach.
>>>
>>> * I suggest that an updating the glossary be tied to a
>>> periodic event, at least annually. I think we should
>>> tie in with the OSGeoLive annual build cycle for this.
>>>
>>> * You haven't mentioned https://osgeo.geolexica.org/
>>> <https://osgeo.geolexica.org/> in your description. I
>>> assume that would be part of the solution? If so, I
>>> suggest mentioning it.
>>>
>>> * Another project I'm helping start up is
>>> https://thegooddocsproject.dev/
>>> <https://thegooddocsproject.dev/> (Writing templates
>>> to make good docs for open source projects). I expect
>>> that the solution you are proposing would be valuable
>>> for a wide variety of domains, and should be captured
>>> as best practices in TheGoodDocsProject. At some point
>>> in the future, I'm hoping that you might provide a
>>> generic version of your suggestions for others to
>>> follow too.
>>>
>>> Feel free to add your ideas below into the wiki at:
>>> https://trac.osgeo.org/osgeolive/wiki/Glossary%20terms
>>>
>>> (Maybe add "DRAFT" at the top, until we have the
>>> process set up.)
>>>
>>> * Ron and Reese, I'm hoping that you both will
>>> continue to provide the leadership and stewardship of
>>> the community as it grows? Your advice has been great
>>> to date.
>>>
>>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Standards mailing list
>>> Standards at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:Standards at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Board mailing list
>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Charter Member
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Open Source Geospatial Foundation
>>> http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cameron Shorter
>>> Technology Demystifier
>>> Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant
>>>
>>> M +61 (0) 419 142 254
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing list
>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
>>> Charter Member
>>> Open Source Geospatial Foundation
>>> http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing list
>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
Charter Member
Open Source Geospatial Foundation
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos
--
Cameron Shorter
Technology Demystifier
Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant
M +61 (0) 419 142 254
--
Cameron Shorter
Technology Demystifier
Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant
M +61 (0) 419 142 254
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
Board at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org>
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Helena Mitasova
Professor, Department of Marine, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences
Faculty Fellow,
Center for Geospatial Analytics
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
hmitaso at ncsu.edu<mailto:hmitaso at ncsu.edu>
--
Cameron Shorter
Technology Demystifier
Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant
M +61 (0) 419 142 254
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Standards at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:Standards at lists.osgeo.org>
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20191114/7ff878dd/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Standards
mailing list