Wow, can’t believe I’ve been missing this thread! I’m on deadline so I will give you a short set of thoughts based on the 25 or so emails I’ve just read.
First, Carlos Rueda (not me) is maintaining the mmisw.org <http://mmisw.org/>-based SKOS form of CF (http://mmisw.org/ont/cf/parameter <http://mmisw.org/ont/cf/parameter>), thanks Roy for the shout out. I note there was an interesting CF viewer that let people search based on the different categories of metadata about each term, I can’t find that URI right now though. (Side note: Apologies to everyone for losing the related MMI-hosted web pages, we’re working to get the MMI site back soon.) It was always my wish that CF could be fully composed in the Common Concepts sense. And I would love for CF to be fully ontologically connected. So my best wishes to those who want to pursue it! I spent maybe a week way back when (5+ years ago), in the “Common Concepts” task days, working on a complete decomposition of CF into concepts. I know Roy has done likewise. So I know you can decompose the component terms into categories, and even order the categories (relative to CF name sequence) to some degree, and achieve about 90% consistency/completion. But I know that after that, it gets harder pretty fast. Though Jonathan’s expression builder was at least as powerful an answer as mine was, so take my perspective for what it’s worth. If I had to do an ontology around CF, I would not do it by starting with CF terms and trying to relate them/derive their patterns. Instead I would do a general ontology of the climate and forecast term types first (units, measurement, substance, direction, etc., etc. — there are about 40 general cases, plus maybe 10 or 20 specific cases). I would consider how those concepts can be meaningfully composed and related, using CF examples to guide me. Then I could describe the existing terms in relation to those fundamental concepts. (But have a look at Scott Peckham’s CSDMS concepts first.) I suspect if you try to build an expression builder for CF terms, the 90% issue raised above will make it an unsatisfying ending. I believe I supplied my spreadsheet as part of a CF metadata list submission, but if you want it I think I can find it. Obviously about 5 years of updates out of date now. :-) John --------------------------------------- John Graybeal [email protected] 650-450-1853 skype: graybealski linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/johngraybeal/ > On Feb 21, 2018, at 11:11, Mcgibbney, Lewis J (398M) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Folks, > I would like to suggest that if folks are seriously interested in pursuing > the notion of moving CF Ontologies forward, then they register the idea with > the ongoing Google Summer of Code efforts taking place at ESIP [0]. > We already have issues registered for SWEET Ontology Alignments and > improvements to the ESIP Community Ontology Repository. I see no reason we > couldn't work as a community on advancing this at Google's expense for the > benefit of ESIP and the CF community. > If you are interested, either let me know here, personally or simply log the > issue and describe what you think such an effort would look like. > As I mentioned previously, there is already tooling available for generating > RDF representations of the CF standard names [2]. I would see this as the > first step in building richer semantics around existing CF resources. > Lewis > > [0] https://github.com/ESIPFed/GSoC/issues > [1] https://github.com/ESIPFed/GSoC/issues/5 > [2] https://github.com/mmisw/cf2rdf > > > On 1/31/18, 6:48 AM, "CF-metadata on behalf of > [email protected]" <[email protected] on behalf > of [email protected]> wrote: > > Send CF-metadata mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of CF-metadata digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: CF Ontologies (Jonathan Gregory) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 14:48:50 +0000 > From: Jonathan Gregory <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] CF Ontologies > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Dear Chris > > The web page to which I gave a link writes down the rules for constructing > the > standard names (of some years ago, but presumably it could be updated). > This > would help with some new standard name proposals, which use existing > patterns > and vocabulary, or existing patterns with new vocabulary that obviously > fits. > The more difficult proposals, which involve most thinking, involve new > concepts > and patterns. > > Best wishes > > Jonathan > > > > _______________________________________________ > CF-metadata mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
_______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
