[Voevent-core] Fwd: standard vocabulary

[Lars Lindberg Christensen]

Hi
If I understand correctly most of your discussion is on our "14. 
Subject.Category: Astronomical Object Taxonomy" (one of 58 proposed tags).
Just a comment: The development of the proposed scheme for this tag has 
been a very long journey (in fact insanely much work was spent on this 
one tag). In the end we all agreed that there was no solution without 
compromises between rigouressness (for instance avoiding 
"Earth-egocentricity" (being just one rock among many)) and simplicity 
(being understandable by non-technical people). Tag 14 as it is, is now 
general, understandable, fulfils the intention it was designed and is 
reasonably complete. But it is not complete in the UCD sense, and that 
was a loss that we had to take deliberately. Note that we expect tag 14 
to develop in the future.

I cannot imagine one taxonomy "one size fits all". I completely support 
the idea of conversion tables between different metadata tag systems (as 
we have also had to do for the very important IPTC system).

Cheers

Lars

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lars Lindberg Christensen (MSc)   . PIO/Head of Comm. ESA Hubble/JWST
Phone:   +49 (0) 89 320 06 306    . Fax:    +49 (0) 89 320 2362
Cell:    +49 (0) 173 38 72 621    . Office: 010
E-mail:  lars at eso.org             . http://www.spacetelescope.org
IAU DIV XII Union-Wide Act. Secr. . IAU WG Comm. Astr. Public Secr.

Address: 
ESA/Hubble
ESO/ESA/ST-ECF
Karl-Schwarzschild-Strasse 2
D-85748 Garching bei München
Germany
----------------------------------------------------------------------



Frederic V. "Rick" Hessman wrote:

> I, for one, knew that the AOI was working on a controlled vocabulary, 
> but their agenda was always geared towards describing press-images 
> rather than defining a general-purpose UCD-like proto-ontology.   
>  However, their approach is at least systematic, which isn't always 
> true for what we've been discussing: both UCD's and the proposed 
> standard vocabulary/VOConcepts tend to look like random collection of 
> ideas which someday may be organized into an ontology.  Yes, I know: 
> it's easy for AOI to be systematic when they limit their scope from 
> the beginning (e.g. they don't have words for things which aren't 
> easily shown in press-images).
>
> The bottom line is that, yes, it would make sense to bring all of the 
> vocabulary people together and to see if we can agree on a common 
> basis.  My guess is that there's little chance, so Rob's idea of 
> everyone having their own private vocabularies (e.g. VOEvent's "GRB" 
> versus the UCD-like "process.burst;em.gamma" versus nothing yet for 
> the AOI list) and the IVOA providing the standard vocabulary as the 
> means of constructing conversion tables still sounds like the best 
> path: everyone gets what they want and the IVOA gets a common standard 
> which everyone can live with.   For example, adding standard 
> vocabulary to the AOI list as a further column would be trivia and any 
> missing elements would be a good sign of where the proposed standard 
> vocabulary needs some additions.
>
> Rick
>
> On 15 May 2006, at 8:15 pm, Rob Seaman wrote:
>
>> Anybody have a comment on this alternative for both RM and controlled 
>> vocabulary?  IVOA must be maturing if it now has two standards for 
>> every problem.  Think VOEvent needs only one.  But which one?
>>
>> Rob
>> ------
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>> *From: *Robert Hanisch <hanisch at stsci.edu <mailto:hanisch at stsci.edu>>
>>> *Date: *May 15, 2006 10:50:03 AM MST
>>> *To: *<semantics at ivoa.net <mailto:semantics at ivoa.net>>
>>> *Subject: **FW: standard vocabulary*
>>> *Reply-To: *Robert Hanisch <hanisch at stsci.edu 
>>> <mailto:hanisch at stsci.edu>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------ Forwarded Message
>>> From: Robert Hanisch <hanisch at stsci.edu <mailto:hanisch at stsci.edu>>
>>> Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 13:47:05 -0400
>>> To: Andrea Preite Martinez <andrea.preitemartinez at rm.iasf.cnr.it 
>>> <mailto:andrea.preitemartinez at rm.iasf.cnr.it>>
>>> Conversation: standard vocabulary
>>> Subject: standard vocabulary
>>>
>>> Hi Andrea.  You might want to look at the document I posted to the 
>>> agenda of
>>> the Registry WG describing metadata for press release images.  The 
>>> authors
>>> of this document have also developed a standard vocabulary.
>>>
>>> http://www.ivoa.net/internal/IVOA/InterOpMay2006ResReg/AOIMetadata_final.pdf
>>>
>>> Bob
>>>
>>> ------ End of Forwarded Message
>>>
>>>
>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ivoa.net/pipermail/semantics/attachments/20060516/1a3392d4/attachment-0001.html>