Loomio
Tue 5 Dec 2017 11:38PM

Data food consortium

D Draft Public Seen by 56

Seems like they are developping norms for the food system : http://datafoodconsortium.org/ :D

TK

Tibor Katelbach Thu 7 Dec 2017 6:17PM

it could be a session next week ​? when's a good day for you ?

LF

Lynn Foster Thu 7 Dec 2017 11:26PM

Tuesday or Friday for us.

TK

Tibor Katelbach Fri 8 Dec 2017 12:25PM

Tuesday could be good
is 11h CET good for you ?

LF

Lynn Foster Fri 8 Dec 2017 12:45PM

We are 7 hours before CET, so I think 14h CET at the earliest, a bit later if you can.

TK

Tibor Katelbach Fri 8 Dec 2017 1:25PM

ok that could work

LF

Lynn Foster Fri 8 Dec 2017 1:37PM

OK, to wrap up, this is a working session to kick off automating the vocabulary translation between ValueFlows and the datafoodconsortium vocab. Me, Bob, Tibor at the moment. 2pm CET / 7am CST on Tuesday Dec. 12. Online somewhere. Does anyone else want to be involved? Will be a technically oriented working session.

MB

Myriam Bouré Tue 12 Dec 2017 12:13AM

Hi there ! Following the conversation here https://github.com/datafoodconsortium/ontology/issues/2 I would suggest you to map the last version of the DFC business ontology as it has changed quite a lot since the first version we published. But e have not yet put it in the owl file so we have not yet published it, we should do that in January or February (I'm in Australia with the OFN crew at the moment so not much time). And happy to have a call with you if needs be next week :-)

BH

Bob Haugen Tue 12 Dec 2017 12:26AM

@myriamboure ! So good to meet you in yet another place! We're having some kind of conversation at 14h CET tomorrow. Seems better to me to map to the new version if possible, but I could be persuaded otherwise. Can you join the conversation then? I think details will be forthcoming here

LF

Lynn Foster Tue 12 Dec 2017 1:10AM

Hi @myriamboure ! Yes great to see you here! And happy to see that lovely colorful diagram. :)

I want to make sure I understand: are you saying the vocabulary is stable but not yet in owl/rdf format? Or that it is also not stable (whatever format it ends up in)?

If the first, we can go ahead I think. This whole process is pretty experimental anyhow; ValueFlows is stable in some parts, and not even done in other parts; the translation software is in progress too. So as long as we understand the status of all the different parts, I don't think it is a problem to give it a try and see what kinds of problems we run into. At least we should learn something.

MB

Myriam Bouré Tue 12 Dec 2017 7:49AM

You definitely need to map the new version @bobhaugen and @lynnfoster, it is not completely stable but I think it's almost, so it should be just minor changes for now. Well at least it has not changed in the last iterations / instanciations, but you know, that's an iterative process so we never really know until when it is stable ;-)
Lynne the owl/rdf format is out of date, so anyway don't use it. So the concepts and relationships model is pretty stable as I say, but the vocabulary might change a bit if we find better terms to describe the concepts and relationships we have captured here.
I can't be there tomorrow as 14:00 is midnight for me and I'll be sleeping :-(

Load More