<html><head></head><body><div class="ydp92c4332yahoo-style-wrap" style="font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;"><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">(resending due to sending error) Thanks for the replies so far. I'm happy to understand more<br clear="none"></div><div><div dir="ltr"><br clear="none"></div><div dir="ltr">I'm curious about a couple of things that don't seem reflected in the webpage for the ontology technical note...<br clear="none"></div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr">Does anyone know:</div><div dir="ltr">- why it did not reach an application stage?</div></div></div><div dir="ltr">- why the study or further work did not continue? </div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><span><span>- Did the ivoa ontology exploration proved to be insufficient, partly so, or otherwise</span></span> (and why)?<br clear="none"></div><div dir="ltr">-
What caused the current effort (the current IVOA vocabularies), rather
than continuing with the ontology or a set of ontologies?</div></div></div><div><br clear="none"></div><div dir="ltr"><span><span>I
think it's valuable that there is a diversity of types of knowledge
organization systems, from controlled vocabularies to ontologies to
other systems, since each has pros and cons. Some can be used as their
counterparts as well.<br clear="none"></span></span></div><span></span><span>So I'm curious about any experiences developing that ontology, any challenges, and any overall findings. </span></div></div>
<div><br></div><div><br></div>
</div><div id="yahoo_quoted_9184942809" class="yahoo_quoted">
<div style="font-family:'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;color:#26282a;">
<div>
On Friday, December 3, 2021, 04:26:38 AM EST, Markus Demleitner <msdemlei@ari.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Robert,<br clear="none"><br clear="none">On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 07:45:29AM +0000, Robert Rovetto wrote:<br clear="none">> Can anyone on the list who were original developers of that<br clear="none">> ontology share the history of it?<br clear="none"><br clear="none">I suppose you're referring to<br clear="none"><a shape="rect" href="https://ivoa.net/documents/Notes/AstrObjectOntology/. " target="_blank">https://ivoa.net/documents/Notes/AstrObjectOntology/. </a>First, for<br clear="none">orientation: This was a technology study that did not actually make<br clear="none">it to any productive application (as far as I am aware). Our current<br clear="none">effort, <a shape="rect" href="http://www.ivoa.net/rdf/object-type/, " target="_blank">http://www.ivoa.net/rdf/object-type/, </a>is only loosely<br clear="none">connected to that. If I were to draw a provenance tree of the whole<br clear="none">thing, this vocabulary would be quite a bit down a different branch.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Having said that, almost all of the original authors are now retired<br clear="none">or are working outside of science and are hence no longer reading<br clear="none">this list. If you'd like to collect some history on that particular<br clear="none">effort, you might hence be better off trying to locate some of the<br clear="none">authors using other channels and ask them directly.<div class="yqt8636345112" id="yqtfd89290"><br clear="none"><br clear="none"> -- Markus<br clear="none"></div></div>
</div>
</div></body></html>