ConferenceCall 2011 01 20

= OntologySummit2011 Launch Event - Thu 2011-01-20 =


 * Topic: OntologySummit2011: "Making the Case for Ontology"


 * Co-chairs: Dr. SteveRay & Dr. NicolaGuarino


 * Representing the Co-organizers:
 * Ontolog - Dr. LeoObrst
 * NIST - Dr. RamSriram
 * NCOR - Professor BarrySmith / Dr. FabianNeuhaus
 * NCBO - Professor MarkMusen
 * IAOA - Dr. NicolaGuarino
 * NCO_NITRD - Dr. GeorgeStrawn


 * Summit Track:
 * Track-1: Ontology Application Framework - MichaelGruninger [co-champions: Dr. MikeUschold & Professor MichaelGruninger & Dr. NicolaGuarino]
 * Track-2: Applications and Case Studies - MikeBennett [co-champions: Mr. MillsDavis & Mr. MikeBennett & ??]
 * Track-3: Value Metrics and Value Models - ToddSchneider [co-champions: Dr. ToddSchneider & Mr. RexBrooks & ??]
 * Track-4: Strategies for "Making the Case" - MatthewWest [co-champions: Dr. MatthewWest & Professor ChrisMenzel & Mr. PeterYim]
 * Track-5: Grand Challenges - ErnieLucier [co-champions: Dr. RamSriram & Mr. ErnieLucier & ??]


 * Archives:
 * Abstract
 * Agenda
 * Prepared presentation material (slides) can be accessed by clicking on each of the title links below:
 * [ 0-Chair ] . [ O1-Ontolog ] . [ O2-NIST ] . [ O3-NCOR ] . [ O4-NCBO ] . [ O5-IAOA ] . [ O6-Strawn-NCO ] . [ T1-Gruninger ] . [ T2-Bennett ] . [ T3-Schneider ] . [ T4-West ] . [ T5-Lucier-Sriram ] . [ A1-Yim ]
 * Audio recording of the session
 * transcript of the online chat during the session
 * Additional Resources

Abstract: Goals & Objectives
OntologySummit2011 Theme: "Making the Case for Ontology"

This is our 6th Ontology Summit, a joint initiative by NIST, Ontolog, NCOR, NCBO, IAOA & NCO_NITRD with the support of our co-sponsors. The theme adopted for this Ontology Summit is: "Making the Case for Ontology." In an earlier planning session last month, the community brainstormed on this initiative and how best to frame the issues. That and subsequent input were carefully reviewed and synthesized by the Summit Organizing Committee, and it is this plan and program that we will be discussing with everyone during this launch event.

While the field of ontology, in the information science sense, has blossomed since the late 1980s, the use of ontology in commercial applications still has not been fully exploited, much less recognized by the mainstream technical community. Many in the ontology community are asked for good examples where using an ontology brings clear benefits to addressing a commercial need - indeed the quest continues for the "killer app" for ontologies. This year's Ontology Summit seeks to address this need to provide concrete evidence of successful deployment of ontologies by examining several application domains for such examples, and in better articulating where different "strengths" of ontological representation are best applied. The goal of the summit is to clearly document some of these examples with solid, quantitative benefits, to indicate promising application areas and research challenges for the future, and to capture the consensus of the community in the form of a communique intended for public consumption.

The 2011 Ontology Summit officially begins with today's launch event. We are initiating a series of topical online discussions, virtual panel sessions, studies, synthesis, etc. which will take place, virtually, in the next 3 months. All of these will come together with a face-to-face meeting on April 18 & 19 in Gaithersburg, MD, USA at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

See developing details at: OntologySummit2011 (home page for this summit)

Agenda
Ontology Summit 2011 Launch


 * Session Format: this is a virtual session conducted over an augmented conference call


 * 1. Opening and Introduction of this year's Ontology Summit Theme (co-chairs) - SteveRay / NicolaGuarino [5 min.]
 * 2. Aspirations for this Summit - remarks from the co-organizers [5 min. each]
 * LeoObrst, RamSriram, BarrySmith, MarkMusen, NicolaGuarino, GeorgeStrawn
 * 3. Summit Structure and Program (co-chairs) - SteveRay & NicolaGuarino [8 min.]
 * 4. Track champions' plans and solicitations (track champions) [8 min. each]
 * MichaelGruninger, MikeBennett, ToddSchneider, MatthewWest, RamSriram
 * 5. Support infrastructure, Process and Administrivia - PeterYim [5 min.]
 * 6. Q & A and open discussion on what the community wants to achieve in this Summit [All: ~20 min.] -- please refer to process above
 * 7. Conclusion / Follow-up - SteveRay

Proceedings:
Please refer to the above

IM Chat Transcript captured during the session:

see raw transcript here.

(for better clarity, the version below is a re-organized and lightly edited chat-transcript.) Participants are welcome to make light edits to their own contributions as they see fit.

-- begin in-session chat-transcript --

SteveRay: Welcome to the OntologySummit2011 Launch Event - Thu 2011-01-20 Topic: OntologySummit2011: "Making the Case for Ontology" Co-chairs: Dr. SteveRay & Dr. NicolaGuarino

anonymous morphed into YuLin

anonymous morphed into David Price

David Price morphed into DavidPrice

SteveRay: Early birds!

SteveRay: See details on the session page at http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2011_01_20#nid2L7T

anonymous morphed into DavidEddy

anonymous1 morphed into JulitaBermejoAlonso

anonymous morphed into PierreGrenon

anonymous morphed into MichelleRaymond

anonymous1 morphed into AlStevens

anonymous morphed into LaurentLiscia OASIS

MikeDean1 morphed into MikeDean

LaurentLiscia OASIS: I'm delighted to be here (albeit lurking in the wings)

LaurentLiscia OASIS: Congratulations to you all as you launch into your new summit.

anonymous1 morphed into EdDodds

anonymous2 morphed into BobbinTeegarden

LaurentLiscia OASIS: And let me state that the case for ontology does not actually need to be made: anyone in standards knows that ontology is the way to go.

anonymous morphed into ElizabethFlorescu

NicolaGuarino: *3 to unmute, right?

FabianNeuhaus: Yes you are right

MikeBennett: Did Peter just mute himself?

PeterYim: got disconnected just now ... I'm back in

Ramdsriram: Steve: How do you un-mute here.

FabianNeuhaus: @Ram: *3

Ramdsriram: @Fabian: Thanks

anonymous1 morphed into AliHashemi

EdDodds: Would folks mind listing any of their Twitter or Identica IDs on the chat? @ed_dodds @conmergence fwiw

MikeBennett: Twitter ID: @MikeHypercube

AmandaVizedom: Twitter ID: ajvizedom

Gary Berg-Cross: Twitter ID garybcross

AlStevens: Twitter ID astevens

SteveRay: My Twitter id: steveraysteve

DavidPrice: Twitter ID : davidpricenet

AmandaVizedom: Relatedly, last year we regretted not having selected a nice, short #hashtag for the conference. Anything for this year, organizers, or is the door open for suggestions?

EdDodds: #ontologysummit2011 works for me

AmandaVizedom: @Ed complaints last year about using 19 char for a hashtag

EdDodds: #ontsum2011

SteveRay: Understand the long hashtag problem, and yet we benefit from the tweets showing up under general searches if we don't abbreviate.

anonymous1 morphed into JohnSowa

anonymous2 morphed into JVermeer

EdDodds: We could target the creation of open courseware for ontology related matter (DSPACE, Open Courseware , curriki , etc.) since this kind of material could prosper in the distance education world.

EdDodds: RE: Education - James H. Shelton III, Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement http://www2.ed.gov/news/staff/bios/shelton.html might be enlisted as an ontology ally

anonymous1 morphed into JeffreyAbbott

anonymous2 morphed into ArturoSanchez

ToddSchneider: @Nicola, is the IAOA web site using https yet?

JohnBateman: @ToddSchneider: Nicola, is the IAOA web site using https yet? An SSL-based layer will soon be brought online for membership registration.

ToddSchneider: @John, excellent. I've been waiting to join.

anonymous2 morphed into TaraAthan

EdDodds: FWIW Real-time user case example: Drupal 7 - http://groups.drupal.org/node/120684 Semantic Web: RDF instance data (and ontology) management on a Sesame Triple-Store

MikeBennett: Thanks Ed.

SteveRay: JohnSowa said: Steve Jobs doesn't use metrics. We can't measure where we want to go. This is a problem.

ToddSchneider: @John, developing a 'wow factor' for infrastructure has always been a challenge.

anonymous1 morphed into Mary Parmelee

ArturoSanchez: @SteveRay and @Nicola: second that! -- Peter is instrumental!

ArturoSanchez: @MichaelGruninger: Re: Track 2: I suggest to use "Ontology-Driven Software Engineering", in lieu of "Ontology-Driven Software Design" ...

ToddSchneider: @Arturo, @Michael, suggest replacing 'software' with 'system'.

ToddSchneider: @Michael, it sounds like you'll be able to develop architectural patterns for the uses of ontologies/semantic technologies.

ArturoSanchez: @ToddSchneider: "O-D Systems" >> Refers to a class of software systems (I presume); O-D Software Engineering >> Refers to the practices associated with building "O-D Systems". So, it seems we want to discuss both concepts ...

NicolaGuarino: I support Todd very much. We should not be limited to software systems. Indeed, the general perspective concerning the future use of ontologies is much broader: from information systems to socio-technical systems.

MichaelGruninger: @Arturo -- I agree, we should refer to "Ontology-driven Software Engineering"

NicolaGuarino: AlanRector said: we should clarify relationship between ontologies vs.data models and data structures

PeterYim: @Alan and all ... if you can capture your main points on this chat board before or after your verbal remarks, that would be great (as the chat-transcript will be captured and become searchable later)

EdDodds: Is OMG.org represented here by anyone -- model driven is their thing

MikeBennett: We are liaising closely with OMG in our work at the EDM Council and are using their ODM metamodel.

ArturoSanchez: @EdDodds: I am not from OMG, but have been associated with "Domain-Specific Software Development" (e.g., ongoing workshop at OOPSLA)

ToddSchneider: @Ed, OMG's model-driven == UML

Ramdsriram: @Todd Not sure I understand that what you mean by model-driven == UML. I believe UML is used as a scheme to represent the model-driven architecture concepts.

EdDodds: @ToddSchneider True but do a quick search on UML & Ontology; quite a little material out there

ToddSchneider: OMG's model-driven approaches are based on UML.

EdDodds: Yes

MikeBennett: For now

AlanRector: Agree that UML is a poor way to develop ontologies; but many of the ontologies we develop have to have, as at least one of their outcomes, UML models / data models or at least provide constraints on them. Furthermore, thre are far more people trained in UML/MDA than ontologies. I look forward to a longer discussion on 3 Feb.

DavidPrice: @MichaelGruninger : Seems slide 3 is 'What roles do ontologies play in applications?'and suggest adding'What are the advantages of the use of ontologies in those roles?'

JulitaBermejoAlonso: There has been some developments on ontologies and UML (even suggesting to move forward to OMG's SysML), mostly for agent-based systems and software engineering

RexBrooks: Just to let you know I'm listening, The Open Group attempted to use a form of UML for a SOA Ontology and the result was neither especially useful, understandable or successful for a number of reasons, but UML is not a great fit for ontologies unless one is very, very careful.

EdDodds: @RexBrooks Thanks

RexBrooks: @Ed Dodds You're welcome.

RexBrooks: Provided we provide an adequate disclaimer, it would be interesting to see how well an application based on the TOG SOA Ontology performs according to the criteria being discussed.

DavidPrice: @ToddSchneider Another core technology behind OMG MDA is QVT ... what's MDA without a transformation engine. Ontology-driven should/could drive a similar need.

ToddSchneider: David, What does QVT stand for?

DavidPrice: Query / View / Transform

Gary Berg-Cross: Mike G makes a point (in passing) the Ontologies provide value (the beef) for something like model-based development.

MichaelGruninger: @Todd: interesting idea to think of the framework as providing architectural patterns; perhaps this will guide us in how detailed we need to make the framework

ToddSchneider: Michael G., Alan's point suggests a decomposition of 'uses' of ontologies in systems development.

AlanRector: On applications: a) Important to clarify relationship between ontologies and data structures / data models.

AlanRector: b) Links to standard software engineering methodologies, UML, MDA, etc

AlanRector: c) To be specific on the added value of "ontology driven architectures"

Ramdsriram: @MichaelGruninger: There is a framework called Zachman Framework. Have you hear of that. May be useful in organizing your track.

MichaelGruninger: @DavidPrice: I saw the discussion of the advantages of ontologies being the focus of Track 3; the framework would be used to help understand how different applications can be compared to each other.

DavidPrice: @MichaelGruninger OK, makes sense there.

JimRhyne: It is hard to argue that something computational can only be done with an ontology. Almost anything I can do with, e.g. OWL / Pellet I can also do with Java and a database. The real difference is how easy it is to create and maintain the behavioral rules for an application in an ontology. A similar argument has been made for rule systems. The problem with rule systems is the difficulty of debugging without some kind of consistency checker.

DavidPrice: @JimRhyne I doesn't have to be about 'can only be done', can simply be 'can be done better, faster, cheaper'

JimRhyne: @DavidPrice - yes, Mike retracted his earlier remarks on slide 2

NicolaGuarino: @MikeBennett: not just "the best that they have", but perhaps also "the worst that they have"... Learning from failures in applying ontologies might be very useful...

MikeBennett: @Nicola that is a good idea. I think what we want for the summation at the Face to Face would be what people did that worked and what they would do differently next time. I'm not sure we'll attract people to present on their failures though

PeterYim: @Nicola ... that said, we still want to build a repertoire of "Best" cases that people can point others to when they are "making a case for ontology"

DavidEddy: ...we're 60+ years into software & haven't quantified it or applied metrics. Why bother with Ontology?

DavidPrice: @MikeBennett slide 5 : Why only business case for ontology as a whole? Why not allow ontology in combination with other technologies or aspects of technologies? Don't understand what that limitation is included.

MikeBennett: @DavidPrice that was weak phrasing on my part. Ontology as a whole range of formal models of reality, not just one type like OWL or RDF. Not ontology in isolation. Will look at how these delivered some value, which is almost always in connection with some application.

BrandNiemann (Semantic Community)1: Re "While the field of ontology, in the information science sense, ... I suggest we consider ontology, in the data science sense, - see http://semanticommunity.info/Data_Science

BrandNiemann (Semantic Community)1: Mills will probably speak to the value proposition next week, which suggests we broaden out to building knowledge-centric systems, not IT centric systems, in which ontology may or may not be needed - see Knowledge-Centric Paradigm: A New World of IT Solutions @ http://semanticommunity.info/@api/deki/files/8282/=BrandNiemann01112011.ppt

PeterYim: @Todd - slide#3 ... [ref. Todd's remark about concentrating only on monetary value] sure we will focus on "value" wrt to ROI (return on investment), but thought we will *also* address other intangible values as well, like quality improvement, strategic impact, and others that have been brought up on the [ontology-summit] list earlier

Brian Haugh: The proposed metrics focus appears to neglect key metrics used in evaluating the quality of results, such as precision and recall in search.

SteveRay: I agree with Peter's point, and Brian's suggestion. The metrics can be monetary, or other types like quality, performance, capability...

BillHogan: I would say that how ontologies facilitate/improve/affect all these aspects of your overall architecture are more important than these things as attributes of the ontology itself.

ToddSchneider: Brain, The metrics I suggested are needed to to bolster the case to decision makers. They need to be simple and related to the primary interests of the decision makers. Your example suggests a particular usage and the metrics for that case may need to stress performance metrics.

ToddSchneider: @Peter, intangible values rarely are of interest to 'decision makers'. However, there may be a useful way to connect these to more base ROI metrics. I leave to the community to help solve this.

PeterYim: [subsequently added] @Todd: for C-level executives and Policy makers, strategic value (mostly intangible) would be very pertinent

NicolaGuarino: @Todd: To understand value metrics and value models, maybe it would be useful to develop an ontology of value and value models... See http://www.vmbo2011.ugent.be/VMBO2011/Welcome.html

ToddSchneider: @Nicola, Yes that occurred to me, but was hesitant to introduce that notion due to the required work and constrained time line. In principal whatever is developed for track 3 will provide a basis for such an ontology.

AlanRector: @RexBrooks & ToddSchneider: How does the argument for ontology in general relate to the ontology spectrum in slide 4 ?

ToddSchneider: @Alan, Slide 3, Ontology Spectrum, was only to suggest that there may need to be either multiple metrics or value sets for the metrics.

RexBrooks: @Todd We should contact Kurt Conrad on the value ontology (ontology of value types) and/or value model ontology (ontology of models associated with various value types). This is, of course, directly related to architectural models, too, hence an NCOIC connection.

AmandaVizedom: Must drop off. Thanks to presenters; looking forward to continuing sessions.

DavidPrice: @ToddSchneider I find it hard to make sense of 'ROI for an ontology'. I understand ROI for an application as that's what affects an organization, but not for particular components of that application. I hope the track can help answer this question.

MikeBennett: @DavidPrice re ROI for an ontology. If someone tried to solve some problem using technical means alone and spent a lot of time and money, and then spent some time creating some ontology and addressed the same problem in less time, there's an ROI.

ToddSchneider: @David, You're correct about 'ROI of ontology'. Hence the focus on system. Systems use ontologies and semantic technologies; Systems have an understandable ROI.

DavidPrice: @ToddSchneider OK - I'll be interested in seeing how it goes. Getting ROI info is notoriously difficult.

ToddSchneider: @David, I also interested in seeing how this goes. Lots of questions, confusion.

RexBrooks: Also, since I am directly involved with using UML is SOA, specifically for the OASIS SOA Reference Architecture Foundation (SOA_RAF), I will be creating an ontology from the SOA-RAF and ensuring that it works, but I will inevitably restrict/qualify it as specific to the SOA-RAF and not SOA at large.

BrianLucas: Another aspect to consider is that to be truly interoperable, I believe the ontologies must themselves be re-usable and cross-referenced (and, ideally, reconciled into upper-level ontologies). I have recently come to the conclusion that upper-level ontologies are very necessary to interoperating lower-level ontologies, if we wish to have any hope of reconciling the separately-developed, domain-specific ontologies. And the connection of these "non-IT" ontologies may help drive the actual IT implementations (UML or otherwise). Perhaps the Grand Challenge track is the place for this thinking?

YuLin: agree with Brian

MikeBennett: +1 agree with Brian

SteveRay: +2 on Brian's remark. I am arguing this very point in integrating the 70+ standards being developed to support the smart grid interoperability in the US.

DavidPrice: @BrianLucas : Upper-or-not is a huge debate and I'd be concerned about it being a on the critical path wrt a good way to 'Make the Case for Ontology' in the larger world. I've worked in both worlds and find strong advocates that disagree completely.

BrianLucas: @DavidPrice : I do not believe it should be on the critical path either. It is a personal interest of mine in the organization space, and I'm launching a non-profit in this domain, but I'll continue the conversation in one or more of the tracks.

DavidPrice: @BrianLucas, I'll be interested in following up on that with as part of the Summit.

JimRhyne: @Nicola - unfortunately VMBO is a workshop format with unpublished proceedings. One has to commit to attending in order to benefit from the discussions.

NicolaGuarino: @Jim: Yes, VMBO is just an informal workshop, but if you look at the organizers and the previous attendants publications you will find a lot of interesting material....

JimRhyne: @Nicola - agreed, been down this path. Not planning to attend this year. How can we get cooperation from the VMBO attendees to work on this problem?

NicolaGuarino: @Jim: I'll talk with the VMBO organizers and let you know. I'll try to involve at least some of them (indeed I am one of them)

RexBrooks: @Todd I sent you an email on my availability, just a heads up.

ToddSchneider: @Rex, Thanks. I'll be in touch.

DavidPrice: @SteveRay at al : Excellent topic for the Summit!

MikeBennett: And I hope everyone will mark their diaries for next Thursday for the first in the Track 2 Applications and Case Studies with Mills Davis.

PeterYim: Great session!

LeoObrst: Thanks, folks, goodbye!

JimRhyne: @Nicola - great - will follow up with you.

MikeBennett: Thanks Peter and everyone. Looking forward to it all.

PavithraKenjige: thank you!

EdDodds: thank you all!

PeterYim: -- session ended: 11:27 am PST --

-- end of in-session chat-transcript --


 * Further Question & Remarks - please post them to the [ ontology-summit ] listserv
 * all subscribers to the previous summit discussion, and all who responded to today's call will automatically be subscribed to the [ ontology-summit ] listserv
 * if you are already subscribed, post to 
 * (if you are not yet subscribed) you may subscribe yourself to the [ ontology-summit ] listserv, by sending a blank email to  from your subscribing email address, and then follow the instructions you receive back from the mailing list system.
 * please email  if you have any question.

Audio Recording of this Session

 * To download the recording of the session, click here
 * the playback of the audio files require the proper setup, and an MP3 compatible player on your computer.
 * Conference Date and Time:	20-Jan-2011 9:38am~11:27am PST
 * Duration of Recording:	1 Hour 38 Minutes
 * Recording File Size:	       11.2 MB (in mp3 format)
 * suggestions:
 * its best that you listen to the session while having the respective presentations opened in front of you. You'll be prompted to advance slides by the speaker.
 * Take a look, also, at the rich body of knowledge that this community has built together, over the years, by going through the archives of noteworthy past Ontolog events. (References on how to subscribe to our podcast can also be found there.)

Additional Resources:

 * Homepage of OntologySummit2011
 * Communitywide brainstorming and planning session Ontology Summit 2011 - ConferenceCall_2010_12_16
 * [ontology-summit] mailing list archives - http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
 * to subscribe to this discussion list: send a blank message from your subscribing email address to  or visit http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/ and subscribe yourself there
 * Homepage of the Summit - see: OntologySummit

For the record ...

How To Join (while the session is in progress)

 * 1. Dial in with a phone: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2011_01_20#nid2L7Z
 * 2. Open chat in a new browser window: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/ontolog_20110120
 * 3. Download presentations for each speaker here: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2011_01_20#nid2L7T
 * or, 3.1 (access our shared-screen vnc server, if you are not behind a corporate firewall)

Conference Call Details

 * Date: Thursday 20-Jan-2011
 * Start Time: 9:30am PST / 12:30pm EST / 6:30pm CET / 5:30pm GMT / 17:30 UTC -
 * see world clock for other time zones
 * do note that this is 1 hour earlier than the usual 1:30 EST Ontolog event time!
 * Expected Call Duration: 1.5~2.0 hours
 * Dial-in Number:
 * from a US telephone (US): +1-218-844-8060 (domestic long distance cost will apply)
 * When calling in from a phone, use Conference ID: "4389979#"
 * from Europe, call:
 * Austria 0820-4000-1577
 * Belgium 070-35-9992
 * France 0826-100-280
 * Germany 01805-00-7642
 * Ireland 0818-270-037
 * Italy 848-390-179
 * Spain 0902-886-056
 * Switzerland 0848-560-327
 * UK 0844-581-9148
 * callers from other countries please dial into either one of the US or European numbers


 * Shared-screen support (VNC session), if applicable, will be started 5 minutes before the call at: http://vnc2.cim3.net:5800/
 * view-only password: "ontolog"
 * if you plan to be logging into this shared-screen option (which the speaker may be navigating), and you are not familiar with the process, please try to call in 5 minutes before the start of the session so that we can work out the connection logistics. Help on this will generally not be available once the presentation starts.
 * people behind corporate firewalls may have difficulty accessing this. If that is the case, please download the slides above and running them locally. The speaker(s) will prompt you to advance the slides during the talk.


 * Discussions and Q & A:
 * (Unless the conference host has already muted everyone) Please mute your phone, by pressing "*2" on your phone keypad, when a presentation is in progress. To un-mute, press "*3"
 * You can type in your questions or comments through the browser based chat session by:
 * pointing a separate browser tab (or window) to http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room and enter: Room="ontolog_20110120" and My Name="Your Own Name" (e.g. "JaneDoe")
 * or point your browser to: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/ontolog_20110120
 * instructions: once you got access to the page, click on the "settings" button, and identify yourself (by modifying the Name field). You can indicate that you want to ask a question verbally by clicking on the "hand" button, and wait for the moderator to call on you; or, type and send your question into the chat window at the bottom of the screen.
 * (when everyone is muted) If you want to speak or have questions or remarks to make, 'please "raise your hand (virtually)" by click on the "hand button" (lower right) on the chat session page. You may speak when acknowledged by the speaker or the session moderator (again, press "*3" on your phone to unmute). Test your voice and introduce yourself first before proceeding with your remarks, please.'' (Please remember to click on the "hand button" again (to lower your hand) and press "*2" on your phone to mute yourself after you are done speaking.)
 * thanks to the soaphub.org folks, one can now use a jabber/xmpp client (e.g. gtalk) to join this chatroom. Just add the room as a buddy - (in our case here) ontolog_20110120@soaphub.org ... Handy for mobile devices!


 * Please review our Virtual Session Tips and Ground Rules - see: VirtualSpeakerSessionTips


 * RSVP to [mailto:peter.yim@cim3.com peter.yim@cim3.com] appreciated.


 * This session, like all other Ontolog events, is open to the public. Information relating to this session is shared on this wiki page: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2011_01_20


 * Please note that this session will be recorded, and the audio archive is expected to be made available as open content to our community membership and the public at-large under our prevailing open IPR policy.

Attendees:

 * Attended / Registered-to-attend:
 * SteveRay (co-chair)
 * NicolaGuarino (co-chair)
 * PeterYim
 * LeoObrst
 * RamSriram
 * FabianNeuhaus
 * MarkMusen (in absentia)
 * GeorgeStrawn
 * ErnieLucier
 * MichaelGruninger
 * MikeBennett
 * ToddSchneider
 * MatthewWest
 * FerencKovacs
 * MaryParmelee
 * BillHogan
 * AlanRector
 * PavithraKenjige
 * AntoinetteArsic
 * DavidPrice
 * BradleyShoebottom
 * HasanSayani
 * AlStevens
 * JimRhyne
 * BernardUlozas
 * JeffAbbott
 * KathyEllis
 * YuriyMilov
 * TimWilson
 * DeborahMacPherson
 * FrankChum
 * GaryBergCross
 * ArturoSanchez
 * DavidLeal
 * PierreGrenon
 * MichelleRaymond
 * JohnSowa
 * AmandaVizedom
 * MikeDean
 * JohnBateman
 * MichaelRiben
 * JimDisbrow
 * BobbinTeegarden
 * BrandNiemann
 * AliHashemi
 * BrianHaugh
 * BrianLucas
 * DavidEddy
 * EdDodds
 * ElizabethFlorescu
 * JulitaBermejoAlonso
 * LaurentLiscia
 * MaryBrady
 * RexBrooks
 * TaraAthan
 * YuLin
 * ... if you are coming to the session, please add your name above (plus your affiliation, if you aren't already a member of the community); or e-mail  so that we can reserve enough resources to support everyone's participation. ...


 * Regrets:
 * MarkMusen
 * BarrySmith