Implementing the Semantic Web Part 1. Semantic Technology Profile for the Data Reference Model: Use Case 1-Geospatial Data : Implementing the Semantic Web Part 1. Semantic Technology Profile for the Data Reference Model: Use Case 1-Geospatial Data Brand Niemann (US EPA), Chair,
Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP)
Best Practices Committee (BPC), CIO Council
August 16, 2005, Workshop
http://web-services.gov/ and
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP
Overview : Overview Objectives:
SICoP needs to provide the Semantic Technology Profile for the Data Reference Model (DRM) (see next slide).
SICoP needs to provide the parts of the Module 3 White Paper “Implementing the Semantic Web” that relate to the DRM (see slide 4).
Build on the Semantic Interoperability Information Sharing Tool Kit Part 2 for the August 16th Workshop and prepare for the DRM Second Quarterly Public Forum, September 14th.
Observations:
The DRM XML Schema V 0.2 Added:
Integrated the Intelligence Community Information Security Marking (IC ISM) XML Schema Version 2.0; and
Geospatial Coverage elements from the DDMS version 1.2.
Which implies the need for future extensibility and modularity:
RDF does this – XML does not! XML are closed documents. See slide 5 for suggested future DRM architecture.
DRM Working Group (as of August 9th) : DRM Working Group (as of August 9th) Deliverables:
Version 1.5:
Chapter: Overview (Michael Daconta)
Chapter: Categorization/Context (Jim Feagans)
Chapter: Sharing (Bryan Aucoin)
Chapter: Description (Larry Fitzwater)
Illustrative Examples
Address Submitted Agency Comments
Glossary of Terms
DRM Management Strategy (Suzanne Acar)
XML Implementation, Approach, and Test (NIST, August 15th)
Milestones:
First Draft, August 31st
Second Quarterly Public Forum: September 14th
Second Draft: September 19th
Third Draft: October 10th
Release: October 17th
Report Outline : Report Outline 1. Introduction
2. Mind Map of the FEA DRM
3. Semantic Technology Profile Process
4. Some Next Steps
Key References
Appendices:
A DRM History
B Glossary
C Additional Details for Section 3
Suggested Future DRM Architecture : Suggested Future DRM Architecture DRM Core Communities of Interest:
IC MWG
NIEM
GEOINT
NICS
NARA
State of Pennsylvania
ISO 11179/XMDR, UBL, UDEF, etc.
Etc. FEA Reference Models
and Profiles:
PRM
BRM
SRM
TRM
Security & Privacy
Records Management
Geospatial
Other:
E-Gov Section 207 (d) Discussed in this Part. Semantic
Interoperability Semantic
Interoperability Phase 1: Taxonomy
Phase 2: Metadata Interoperability
Phase 3: Executable Data Interoperability
Suggested Future DRM Architecture : Suggested Future DRM Architecture Sir Tim Berners-Lee at the SWANS Conference, April 7 on “the constant tension” Keep a wise balance.
The semantic web allows a mixture of the two approaches, and smooth transitions between them.
Suggested Future DRM Architecture : Suggested Future DRM Architecture Sir Tim Berners-Lee at the SWANS Conference, April 7 on the Government Role:
Making public data available in standard Semantic Web formats.
Requiring funded data to be available in Semantic Web formats
Encouraging flagship applications.
Supporting Web Science research for advanced tools.
1. Introduction : 1. Introduction SICoP Charter:
White Papers, Conferences/Workshops, and Pilots:
White Papers 1: Introducing Semantic Technologies and the Vision of the Semantic Web ("DRM of the Future") Delivered to the CIO Council's Architecture & Infrastructure and Best Practices Committees, February 16, 2005.
White Paper 2: The Business Case for Semantic Technologies, Interim Delivered at the SWANS Conference, April 7, 2005 (see next slide).
White Paper 3: Implementing the Semantic Web, Multiple Parts with Use Cases, starting with this presentation (see next slide).
Objectives:
Based on Best Practice Semantic Web applications like DOAP which in turn is based on FOAF (see section 3).
Use DRM Lessons Learned and GWG MFG as the First Use Case (see section 3).
1. Introduction : 1. Introduction Upcoming Presentations:
FCW Enterprise Architecture Conference, September 21, 2005, Session 1-7: Using EA to Support the Budget Process.
Also Joint Meeting of the Chief Architect Forum, Federal IT Performance Measurement, and Semantic Interoperability Communities of Practice.
GCN Data Lifecycle Management Conference: Storage to Management, October 11, 2005, Session 2: Data sharing and standards.
Also SICoP Public Meeting on White Papers (The Business Case for Semantic Technologies and Implementing the Semantic Web).
IDEAlliance XML 2005 Conference, November 17, 2005:
Presentation on The US Federal CIO Council's Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP).
2. Mind Map of the FEA DRM : 2. Mind Map of the FEA DRM The Mind Map Book: How to Use Radiant Thinking to Maximize Your Brain’s Untapped Potential (Tony Buzan):
Before the web came hypertext. And before hypertext came mind maps.
A mind map consists of a central word or concept, around the central word you draw the 5 to 10 main ideas that relate to that word. You then take each of those child words and again draw the 5 to 10 main ideas.
Mind maps allow associations and links to be recorded and reinforced.
The non-linear nature of mind maps makes it easy to link and cross-reference different elements of the map.
See next slide for examples from the “Explorer’s Guide to the Semantic Web,” Thomas Passin, Manning Publications, 2004, pages 106 and 141.
See Appendices A and B for details for slide 12.
Mind Maps for Searching and Ontologies : Mind Maps for Searching and Ontologies Searching hugh
changing
growing
inconsistent keywords
ontologies
classification
metadata
semantic Focusing
social Analysis
multiple Passes
clustering Ontologies ENVIRONMENT STRATEGIES informal
formal
distinctions
multiple
trees
hierarchies
taxonomies
vocabularies combining
specifying
committment CLASSIFICATION ONTOLOGIES properties
relationships
constraints
identifiers NAMES RDFS
OWL
DAML
Description Logics LANGUAGES adhoc
categories
internet KINDS predefined Note: These are not complete.
2. Mind Map of the FEA DRM : 2. Mind Map of the FEA DRM Data Reference Model DRM Volume 1, Version 1
Karen Evans Memo
Executive Order 13356
Markle Foundation Report
E-Gov Act of 2002 Key Documents Designing for Information Sharing
Revised DRM Structure
Targeted Semantics
Model-Driven Services Architecture
Formal Taxonomies
Success Strategy
Relational, XML & Semantic Technology Profiles
Markle Use Cases
XML Schema & Implementation Guidance
Executable
COI Harmonization
Data Fidelity
Abstract Model Package/Class View Michael Daconta Three Tiers:
Executive
Team
Public Forum
Wiki Technology
Volume Strategy
Voting/Non-Concurs
Teams (2)
Public Forums (2)
Section 207 Use Case
Compressed Schedule
Reorganization
Communication to CIOs
Tactical Goals (3)
Dimensions (3)
Deliverables
XML Schema Testing
FEA Profiles (3) DRM Process Early Adoptors NICS
NARA
NIST
NHIN
NIEM
XMLCoP
SICoP
Etc. Note: These are not complete.
3. Semantic Technology Profile Process : 3. Semantic Technology Profile Process 3.1 Survey and Harmonize Vocabularies
3.2 Technology Choices: XML versus RDF
3.3 Basic Tools: Viewing, Creating, & Validating
3.4 Management: Community, Interoperability, and Extensibility
See DOAP: Description of a Project Tutorial Based on the Work of Edd Dumbill, Editor of XML.Com:
http://web-services.gov/scope08162005b.ppt
DOAP Home Page: http://usefulinc.com/doap
3.1 Survey and Harmonize Vocabularies : 3.1 Survey and Harmonize Vocabularies National System for Geospatial Intelligence (NSG):
Integration of technology, policies, capabilities, and doctrine necessary to conduct geospatial intelligence in a multi-intelligence environment that includes the DoD and non-DoD components of the Intelligence Community (IC), including, where appropriate, coalition and Federal civil agency partners.
GEOINT Standards Working Group (GWG):
Community forum to advance GEOINT interoperability across the NSG by mandating relevant standards and populating the DoD IT Standards Registry (DISR).
GWG Metadata Focus Group (MFG):
The mission of the MFG is to serve as a geospatial intelligence (GEOINT) community forum to identify requirements for the development of harmonized GEOINT metadata, identify and resolve standardization and interoperability issues relating to the development of geospatial intelligence information, and as a conduit for information and coordination relating to GEOINT metadata activities within the community.
Drivers (e.g. IC MWG), Producers (e.g. DHS COI MWG), and Contributors (e.g. CIA).
3.1 Survey and Harmonize Vocabularies : 3.1 Survey and Harmonize Vocabularies Row # Name
Definition
Conditionality
Source
1
resource title
name by which the cited resource is known
Mandatory
ISO 19115; Dublin Core
IC Core; DDMS
GMAP 2
resource reference date
reference date for the cited resource
Mandatory
ISO 19115; Dublin Core
IC Core; DDMS
GMAP 3
resource abstract
brief narrative summary of the content of the resource(s)
Mandatory
ISO 19115; Dublin Core
IC Core; DDMS
GMAP 4
metadata point of contact
party responsible for the metadata information
Mandatory
ISO 19115; GMAP 5
metadata date stamp
date that the metadata was created
Mandatory
ISO 19115; GMAP
6
dataset language
language(s) used within the dataset
Mandatory
ISO 19115; Dublin Core
IC Core; DDMS
GMAP All Geospatial Metadata Data Dictionaries in Development
(See slide 17 for Source URL.)
3.1 Survey and Harmonize Vocabularies : 3.1 Survey and Harmonize Vocabularies Geospatial
Recommended
Core (RC) V
(MC) I
(MC) V
(RC) Mandatory Core (MC) Recommended
Core (RC) Geospatial
Mandatory Core (MC) I
(RC) S
(RC) All Datasets
(IC Metadata, DDMS, Dublin Core) All Geospatial Datasets
(‘All Datasets’ (above) & ISO 19115) Specific Geospatial Datasets
(in development) Organizational Extensions
(in development) S
(MC) Mandatory/Recommended Metadata Sets for the Geospatial Community
(See slide 17 for Source URL.)
3.1 Survey and Harmonize Vocabularies : 3.1 Survey and Harmonize Vocabularies This data dictionary contains the set of metadata (30) recommended for use in discovery and retrieval applications:
Ten elements are deemed to be Mandatory and must be used for compliancy to mandated standards.
Four elements are Conditional, meaning they are Mandatory when a specific condition is met (otherwise, they are optional).
Sixteen elements are Optional and are included here as they represent a common set of metadata that is found to be useful for discovery and retrieval.
NGA Recommended Core Data Dictionary for Geospatial Metadata:
See http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/Expedition_Workshop/2005_08_16_DesigningTheDRM_forDataAccessibility/MD%20Core%20DD%20w%20colDesc_v3.doc
GWG Metadata Focus Group (GWG MFG), Inaugural Meeting, August 3-4, 2005, Chantilly, VA:
See especially Lessons Learned Summary (Slide 94) in http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/Expedition_Workshop/2005_08_16_DesigningTheDRM_forDataAccessibility/GWG%20MD%20FG%20first%20mtg%20for%208-3-05.ppt
3.2 Technology Choices: XML versus RDF : 3.2 Technology Choices: XML versus RDF Rationale in DOAP:
Technology Choices:
Dublin Core (DC) Metadata Elements Set.
RSS (RDF Site Summary/Really Simple Syndication)
ebXML
HTML
Etc.
XML or RDF?
The majority of DC deployment on the Web has been with RDF.
For metadata applications, RDF is generally considered the first choice language, but unfortunately and undeservedly, has a reputation as a bit of a bogieman due to its additional constraints over XML.
A straight XML document would have no meaning for an application that didn’t have explicit code to process the DOAP namespace, even if it had the corresponding schema.
A big unresolved problem remains in XML – the namespace mixing issue – each XML vocabulary remains an island, but RDF has a well-specified solution.
Summary:
For the purposes of automated consumption, RDF Schema will be used to specify the DOAP vocabulary, augmented by prose to explain it.
Look for ways to mitigate the perceived complexity of RDF and to use normal XML tools. Note: See Slide 9 in http://web-services.gov/scope08162005b.ppt
and recall “Suggested Future DRM Architecture” in slide 5.
3.3 Tools: Viewing, Creating, Validating : 3.3 Tools: Viewing, Creating, Validating Express NGA Core (30) in RDF Using Shelley Powers, Practical RDF, Code Examples & ConvertToRDF Tool (See Appendix C).
Presentation at GCN Conference on Storage to Knowledge – The Life Cycle Approach, October 11, 2005:
Adapting DOAP Tools for Viewing, Creating, and Validating (in process).
Also Address Usability Testing, Repository, and Inferencing:
See Selected DOAP and Oracle 10g R2 Screen Captures in Next Slides.
3.3 Tools: Validating and Inferencing : 3.3 Tools: Validating and Inferencing http://doapy.bonjourlesmouettes.org/doap-validator
3.3 Tools: Validating and Inferencing : 3.3 Tools: Validating and Inferencing Note: See 39. Grandfathers – With Inferencing in http://web-services.gov/scope08162005a.ppt
3.4 Management: Community, Interoperability, and Extensibility : 3.4 Management: Community, Interoperability, and Extensibility DOAP on Community:
Even with tools in place, if there's no community gathered around the DOAP project, then it is unlikely to last very long. When introducing a new technology, communication is paramount.
It is important that the aims of the project are clearly expressed, as are the rules of engagement. The most basic step in communication is to construct a Web site that will hold all the relevant documentation and point to resources that those interested in the project can use.
Finally, the project must be seeded by promoting it to those who are likely to be interested. I will be promoting it in various mailing lists and to key people in the open source world.
Ontolog Forum/SICoP Suggestion: Augment the Wiki with Oracle 10gR2, Protégé, etc. Tools:
September 14th Second DRM Public Forum Presentation in Process. Note: See Slide 29 in http://web-services.gov/scope08162005b.ppt
4. Some Next Steps : 4. Some Next Steps Recall Suggested Future DRM Architecture (slide 5).
The FEA Records Management and Security & Privacy Profiles Would Seem to be the Next High Priorities (see slides 22 and 23):
Second DRM Public Forum at MITRE, September 14, 2005.
Collaborative Expedition Workshop #44 at NSF, Governance and Procurement Readiness Challenges in Future Services Oriented Architecture: Leveraging the Data Reference Model, September 23, 2005.
GCN Conference on Storage to Knowledge – The Life Cycle Approach and the Ronald Reagan Building, October 11-12, 2005.
4. Some Next Steps : 4. Some Next Steps Records Management Profile:
Definition: A cross-cutting overlay of the FEA, tying together records management considerations throughout the five FEA reference models:
The field of management responsible for the systematic control of the creation, maintenance, use, and disposition of records.
Records: all books, papers, maps, photographs, machine readable materials, or other documentary materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by an agency of the United States Government, etc., etc.!
Information Sharing: Refers to the DRM!
Scenario and Phase II Considerations: Mission Application with a Records Management Component and Collaboration with Other FEA Profile Projects (i.e., security and privacy, geospatial).
4. Some Next Steps : 4. Some Next Steps Security & Privacy Profile (Basis for RDF Vocabulary):
Definition: Provides an understandable, consistent, repeatable, scalable, and measurable methodology that uses relevant FEA Reference Model information (i.e., context and conditions) to support business owners in accurately determining security categorization and establishing an appropriate set of security controls in accordance with NIST guidance.
Information Sharing (4 instances): The FEA Security and Privacy Profile will benefit stakeholders by helping them to — Understand security and privacy-related context and conditions and relate them to the value-benefit of information sharing within the business line context (e.g., relevant factors)
Scenario and Phase II Considerations: Notional initiative, “eConsolidate” (eCon), and more applicability to daily needs. Source: FEA Security and Privacy Profile Phase I Final, Coordinating Draft,
July 29, 2004, 26 pp. See DKR at http://web-services.gov
Key References : Key References Karen Evans, Vice-Chair of CIO Council, December 13, 2002:
In all things we see the Council’s mission to ….. develop taxonomy and XML data definitions that apply across government (1 of 6 things).
See http://web-services.gov/CIOCouncil.pdf
Karen Evans, Administrator, E-Gov and Information Technology, Dec. 22, 2004:
The AIC will launch an interagency collaborative working group to develop the next version of the FEA DRM and associated implementation guidelines.
The first task of the working group will be to create a detailed work plan for revising, completing, validating and evolving the Data Reference Model.
It is critical your representative(s) has experience in one or more of the following disciplines: data description (database schema design), categorization (taxonomy design), exchange (XML Schema design) and search (query and indexing).
John Lee (FEA-PMO), Kim Nelson (OMB), and Roger Costello (OMB) on behalf of Karen Evans:
Directions to the AIC (May 21) and to the DRM WG (May 19): Address the E-Gov Act 2002, Section 207 (d) requirements in the DRM work and accelerate the schedule to meet an October 17th deadline.
The BRM, TRM, SRM and A300 have XML Schemas because OMB needs structured data to facilitate processing and analysis.
See http://www.cio.gov/documents/fy2005_final_XML_schema.html
Appendix A: DRM History : Appendix A: DRM History Collaborative Expedition Workshop #36, October 19, 2004 at NSF, Evolving a Multi-Stakeholder Best Practices Process for Implementing An FEA DRM XML Profile and Open Standards Web Applications: Introduction to Semantic Technology Tools and Applications:
Designing the FEA DRM for Information Sharing, Michael Daconta, October 9, 2004.
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ExpeditionWorkshop/Multi_StakeholderBestPracticeProcessforImplementingFEA_Data_Reference_Model_XMLProfile_2004_10_19
Appendix A: DRM History : Appendix A: DRM History Formal Taxonomies for the U.S. Government, Michael Daconta, January 26, 2005.
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2005/01/26/formtax.html
Creating Relevance and Reuse with Targeted Semantics, Michael Daconta, XML 2004 Conference Keynote, November 16, 2004.
Model Driven Services Architecture, Michael Daconta, December 20, 2004.
FEA DRM Success Strategy, Michael Daconta, January 17, 2005, and February 3, 2005. For the last three above see:
http://web-services.gov/lpBin22/lpext.dll/Folder17/Infobase/1?fn=main-j.htm&f=templates&2.0
Appendix A: DRM History : Appendix A: DRM History Collaborative Expedition Workshop #38, February 22, 2005 at NSF, Semantic Conflict, Mapping, and Enablement: Making Commitments Together:
Introduction to FEA DRM Success Strategy, Michael Daconta, February 3, 2005, and Introduction to the Data Reference Model Public Forum, Susan Turnbull.
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ExpeditionWorkshop/SemanticConflictMappingandEnablement_MakingCommitmentsTogether_2005_02_22
Appendix A: DRM History : Appendix A: DRM History Collaborative Expedition Workshop #39, March 15, 2005 at NSF, Toward a National Unified Geospatial Enterprise Architecture: Seeing the Way Forward Together:
Implementing the FEA DRM, Michael Daconta.
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ExpeditionWorkshop/TowardaNationalUnifiedGeospatialEA_SeeingtheWayForwardTogether_2005_03_15
Appendix A: DRM History : Appendix A: DRM History First Data Reference Model Public Forum and Sixth Quarterly Emerging Technology Components Conference, June 13, 2005, at The MITRE Corporation:
The Data Reference Model: Milestone 1: Moving from Abstract to Concrete, Michael Daconta.
Management Strategy, Mary McCaffery.
The DRM XML Schema, Michael Daconta, Andy Hoskinson, Joseph M. Chiusano.
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?DataReferenceModelPublicForum_2005_06_13
Appendix A: DRM History : Appendix A: DRM History Collaborative Expedition Workshop #41, Tuesday, June 28, 2005 at NSF, Open Standards for Government Information Sharing: Timing the Transformations Needed for Sustained Progress By Combining the Expertise of Multiple Communities:
The Evolution of the Data Reference Model: Moving from the Abstract to the Concrete, MikeDaconta.
FEA DRM Schema Specification (Draft Version 0.1): Analysis and Two Use Cases (Taxonomy and Interoperability), Brand Niemann.
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ExpeditionWorkshop/OpenStandardsForGovernmentInformationSharing_DRM_TimingTheTransformation_2005_06_28
Appendix A: DRM History : Appendix A: DRM History Collaborative Expedition Workshop #42, Tuesday, July 19, 2005 at NSF, Designing the DRM for Data Visibility: Building Sustainable Stewardship Practices Together:
The FEA Data Reference Model: Update and Vignette Walkthrough, Michael Daconta.
The Data Reference Model Information Sharing Tool Pilot Part 1, Brand Niemann.
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ExpeditionWorkshop/DesigningTheDRM_DataVisibility_2005_07_19
Appendix A: DRM History : Appendix A: DRM History Collaborative Expedition Workshop #43, Tuesday, August 16, 2005 at NSF, Designing the DRM for Data Accessibility: Building Sustainable Stewardship Practices Together - Part 2:
The FEA Data Reference Model: Business Case and Dimensions, Michael Daconta, July 21, 2005.
http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/Expedition_Workshop/2005-07-19_DesigningTheDRMforDataVisibility/Daconta_FEA_DRM_2005_07_19.ppt
The Semantic Interoperability Information Sharing Tool Kit Pilot Part 2, Brand Niemann, August 16, 2005.
http://web-services.gov/scope08162005.ppt
Appendix B: Glossary : Appendix B: Glossary Semantics:
A branch of linguistics that deals with the study of meaning, changes in meaning, and the principles that govern the relationship between sentences or words and their meanings. Semantics also involves effective information communication within and across languages, information surrogation, information organization, and discovery.
Extracted from the Mission Statement of the Taxonomies and Semantics Special Interest Group, http://km.gov/.
Semantic Interoperability:
Semantic interoperability is an enterprise capability derived from the application of special technologies that infer, relate, interpret, and classify the implicit meanings of digital content, which in turn drive business process, enterprise knowledge, business rules and software application interoperability.
"Adaptive Information: Improving Business Through Semantic Interoperability, Grid Computing, and Enterprise Integration" by Jeff Pollock and Ralph Hodgson, Wiley Publishing 2004.
Appendix B: Glossary : Appendix B: Glossary Ontology:
An ontology is a specification of a conceptualization.
Tom Gruber, Stanford University, http://www-ksl.stanford.edu/kst/what-is-an-ontology.html.
An OWL-encoded web-distributed vocabulary of declarative formalisms describing a model of a domain.
Semantic Web:
Semantic Web is an extension of the current Web in which information is given well-defined meaning, better enabling computers and people to work in cooperation.
"The Semantic Web", By Tim Berners-Lee, James Hendler and Ora Lassila, Scientific American, May 2001.
Community of Interest:
Organization or group of individuals with a common interest in a particular subject or domain.
Appendix B: Glossary : Appendix B: Glossary Sources:
SICoP White Paper Series Module 1: Introducing Semantic Technologies and the Vision of the Semantic Web, Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP), Updated on 2/16/2005, Version 5.4:
http://web-services.gov
Lee Lacy, OWL – Representing Information Using the Web Ontology Language, Trafford, 2005:
http://www.trafford.com/4dcgi/robots/04-1276.html
Appendix C: Additional Details for Section 3 : Appendix C: Additional Details for Section 3 In process - to be added after August 16th Workshop.
Suggestions:
Express NGA Core (30) in RDF Using:
Shelley Powers, Practical RDF, Code Examples:
E.g. use three properties mandatory, conditional, and optional.
MindSwap’s ConvertToRDF Tool
See Readme file for directions
Appendix C: Additional Details for Section 3 : Appendix C: Additional Details for Section 3 In process - to be added after August 16th Workshop.
Appendix C: Additional Details for Section 3 : Appendix C: Additional Details for Section 3 In process - to be added after August 16th Workshop.