Tony.Linde at leicester.ac.uk
Mon Feb 26 07:51:19 PST 2007
Thanks for the links - and I look forward to the demos. I only mentioned the
two below since both seem to be aimed at documenting all astronomical
But while we're at it, maybe we could get everyone lurking on the list but
developing ontologies or the like, to say what they're working on.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-semantics at eso.org
> [mailto:owner-semantics at eso.org] On Behalf Of Elizabeth Auden
> Sent: 26 February 2007 15:04
> To: semantics at ivoa.net
> Subject: Re: Ontology assessment?
> > 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):
> Francois Bonnarel and I are working on queries to these three
> 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
> 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.
> Elizabeth Auden, MSSL
> Holmbury St. Mary, Dorking RH5 6NT
> Tel: +44 (0)1483 204 276
> eSDO Technical Lead, AstroGrid Developer
More information about the semantics