Vocabularies: formal parenthesis

[Andrea Preite Martinez]

Quoting Tony Linde <Tony.Linde at leicester.ac.uk>:

> The point I was making is that this is a *private* document and not one
> which belongs to the working group. The wg has not decided it wants a
> vocabulary document (or anything at all at this point) and if/when it does
> so decide, it will first debate the format in which it wants that vocabulary
> and then will start work on that document.
>
> If the wg decides that a Note which a person or group has submitted is a
> useful starting point for a WD then it can ask that the Note be copied to a
> WD document with the appropriate heading changes.
>
> These documents are Notes only and should be written and posted as such. A
> WD can only be created when the wg decides that it wants one after suitable
> discussion.

Let me first remind you what I already said in a msg posted on Mon, 10  
Sep 2007.

The document under discussion (and of course subject to revision as a  
result of this discussion) is about:

1. the definition of a Standard Vocabulary.
This is to assure inter-operability among different VO groups talking  
different astronomical dialects. Using the SV they can understand each  
other just declaring what the "equivalence" of their concepts is  
against a standard way to define those concepts (8 pages, excluding  
examples).

2. the way (format) these vocabularies could be written (2 pages,  
including a figure and an example).
I stress the "could": this is a minimal proposal, using a format  
widely adopted in other IVOA documents / standards.

Unfortunately, we treated the format in the first place, and this  
possibly gave the readers the wrong impression that it was our first  
priority, or the main scope of the document. Which is not, although  
not at all irrelevant ? as the discussion is showing.

Here I come to the point raised by Tony.

Can we say that the main subject treated in this draft is: (a) outside  
the scope of the WG and/or (b) never presented to the WG and/or (c)  
never discussed?

What follows can help answer the above questions.

(a) outside the scope of the WG Semantics?
=========================================

 From the Charter of the Semantics WG (discussed: InterOp Madrid,  
approved by Exec: 17 May 2006) :
..
2. A rationale for Semantics
..
In the same period of time, other WGs realized the need to interact  
with our WG in order to standardise the vocabulary used to describe  
the data they were working on (e.g.: DM/SSAP, VOEvents/VOConcepts).  
The request (implicit at the beginning) was to expand and generalize  
the work done on UCDs, and so update our task into the definition of a  
standard vocabulary in the fields covered by IVOA activities.
..
3. A charter for the Semantics WG
..
The activities of the IVOA Semantics WG can be classified as follows:
- Maintenance of UCDs
- IVOA Standard Vocabulary
- Exploration of Ontologies
..
3.2. Standard Vocabulary
..
The main activity of the Semantics WG will be to define the basic  
elements of a Standard Vocabulary (SV) in all the fields covered by  
IVOA activities. Starting from already available lists of astronomical  
words, objects, or concepts (the old thesaurus, keywords used in  
Journals, and the actual text of scientific papers), we will try to  
define the basic concepts (processes, instruments, methods, object  
types, etc.), the instances of these concepts, and possibly the  
relationships among them. The concepts will be described using a  
syntax similar to that already used for UCDs.


(b)-(c) never presented / discussed?
====================================

A brief (and certainly incomplete) chronology concerning the Standard  
Vocabulary:

A private note on Standard Vocabulary firstly appeared on the WG page  
at the end of 2005 (20-12-2005), upgraded 05-05-2006;

Discussions:
within WG session:
- at Madrid InterOp (presentation on: Astronomical Thesaurus);
- at Victoria InterOp (presentation on: Towards an IVOA standard vocabulary)
- at Beijing InterOp (Sub-session: Vocabulary: astronomical keywords  
and the VO)

Joint discussions:
- with VOEvent and DM WGs at Kyoto InterOp;
- then with Theory IG at Victoria InterOp;

Within the VOEvent WG:
- Since May 2006, a special page  
(http://www.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/VOEventVocabulary ) is open  
to present   "...  the discussion in the IvoaVOEvent working group of  
how to build a controlled vocabulary for describing: astrophysical  
objects, astrophysical processes,  astronomical instrumentation .."   
Links to the three vocabularies are provided there. The lists of  
concept/SV-token are nothing else but those also published in the  
Semantics page in the private document on Standard Vocabulary (see  
above).
- VOEvent Workshop, April 13-14, 2005
- The Second VOEvent Workshop, Tucson, December 5 - 6, 2005

End of the second formal parenthesis

Cheers
Andrea

===================================================================================
Andrea Preite Martinez                 andrea.preitemartinez at iasf-roma.inaf.it
IASF                                   Tel.IASF:+39.06.4993.4641
Via del Fosso del Cavaliere 100        Tel.CDS :+33.3.90242452
I-00133 Roma                           Cell.   :+39.320.43.15.383
                                        Skype   :andrea.preite.martinez
===================================================================================