Ontology assessment?

[Elizabeth Auden]

> We now have two (that I know of: any more?) astro ontologies under
> development: Andrea's and Ed's. Do they both have the same goal or scope?
> Are they interoperable (if such is possible with ontologies)? Will we need a
> translator app if one system uses Andrea's and another uses Ed's?
>
> I'm all in favour of competing efforts - that's the only way to test ideas -
> but when should we assess them and what criteria should we assess them
> against?

I'd like to throw 3 more related ontologies into the ring - those 
developed from the IVOA's VOEvent 1.1, STC 1.3, and Characterization 1.0 
(currently being upgraded):

http://eurovotech.org/twiki/bin/view/VOTech/VoEventOntology
http://eurovotech.org/twiki/bin/view/VOTech/StcOntology
http://eurovotech.org/twiki/bin/view/VOTech/CharacterisationOntology

Francois Bonnarel and I are working on queries to these three ontologies 
that can match 2MASS observations described by the Characterisation schema 
with VOEvents found in the OGLE, SDSS and GCN RSS feeds (so I've been 
keeping these on the quiet side until I can show them working together 
convincingly.  :)  We plan to demonstrate the work at the VOTech meeting 
in Munich next month, and from there I'd like to look at incorporating Ed 
and Andreas ontologies into existing queries to VOEvent, STC and Char.

cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
Elizabeth Auden, MSSL
Holmbury St. Mary, Dorking RH5 6NT
Tel: +44 (0)1483 204 276
eSDO Technical Lead, AstroGrid Developer