[CF-metadata] standard_name.xml

John Caron caron at unidata.ucar.edu
Thu Apr 6 16:29:22 MDT 2006


Hi Luis:

Luis Bermudez wrote:
> Dear Roy and John,
> 
> There are a lot of issues when we want to perform mappings 
> between vocabularies that are continuously evolving, for example GCMD, 
> CF and BODC. 
> 
> OWL is a very good mechanism to express mappings, but the vocabularies 
> are not originally in OWL. This is the reason that we have some tools at 
> MMI to do an automatic conversion of this vocabularies to OWL. 

So are you harvesting the CF at  http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cms/eaton/cf-metadata/standard_name.xml   and converting to http://marinemetadata.org/2005/02/cf, or ? 


> That way 
> we have them all harmonized (expressed in the same language/format) and 
> we can resolve semantic heterogeneities in a better fashion. 

Can you explain what tools are needed to make these translation (or point me to some URL)? Do you need an OWL reasoning engine or can something simpler be used? Are there any working examples?

What does the OWL need to look like? Are the files at:

http://marinemetadata.org/2005/02/cf
http://marinemetadata.org/2005/02/gcmd

examples of what is needed?


> 
> I just make publicly available the plan of a  strategy we have in mind 
> at MMI. It is here:
> http://marinemetadata.org/examples/mmihostedwork/ontologieswork/watchdogstrategy/strategyt 
> 
> I have made some tests and look at a more concrete framework to allow 
> the representation and mapping of these terms by using SKOS 
> : http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/.
> 
> John and Roy, maybe we can talk in more detail what are your ideas and 
> make a plan to move this forward. I'll be glad to know if the 
> MMI strategy sounds reasonable and if more people are interested in 
> participating.

I would be happy to fit my efforts into your larger efforts, if possible. I will neeed to understand the requirements better, before I know for sure.

Thanks!



> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Luis
> 
> 
> 
> On Apr 6, 2006, at 12:14 AM, Roy Lowry wrote:
> 
>> Hello John,
>>
>> Mapping CF Standard names to GCMD Parameter Valids to the public 
>> domain 'variable' level shouldn't be a problem as the GCMD vocabulary 
>> is clearly a discovery vocabulary.  The issues Bryan is eluding to 
>> result from trying to map a usage vocabulary (one containing terms 
>> that fully describe a data value) because vital information for the 
>> mapping (e.g. whether a value is a mean or a standard deviation) are 
>> held in CF fields other than the Standard Name.
>>
>> Are you aware of the MMI vocabulary mapping workshop that was held in 
>> Boulder last August?  CF was one of the vocabs used, but the work 
>> really only scratched the surface looking at maybe half a dozen 
>> terms.  There should still be an OWL version of CF on the MMI site (as 
>> well as GCMD), but this will a snapshot that is now well out of date.  
>> There is however an open source tool to convert the XML to OWL 
>> (voc2OWL) and a very neat mapping tool (VINE).  The resulting map is 
>> an OWL file that can be used with web services also provided by MMI to 
>> build a thesaurus server.  I would strongly recommend their approach.
>>
>> The one issue with the GCMD parameter valids that was never properly 
>> sorted at Boulder is that the mapping was done to GCMD variable terms 
>> without their overlying term hierarchy, which took no account of the 
>> fact that EARTH SCIENCE > Biosphere > Animal Taxonomy > Fish and EARTH 
>> SCIENCE >  Oceans > Marine Biology > Fish are different.  I know Luis 
>> Bermudez of MMI was looking at this issue, but don't know how far he got.
>>
>> Building an ontology mapping between CF and GCMD was on my agenda for 
>> later this year to provide the capability to NDG for entering a CF 
>> Standard Name into a discovery portal and finding DIFs marked up using 
>> GCMD parameter valids.  But I'm more than happy for someone else to 
>> make a start and would of course be happy to help once the time slot 
>> I've allocated for later this year comes around.
>>
>> Cheers, Roy.
>>
>>>>> John Caron <caron at unidata.ucar.edu <mailto:caron at unidata.ucar.edu>> 
>>>>> 4/5/2006 8:51:15 pm >>>
>>
>> Is the standard name table in XML at:
>>
>>   http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cms/eaton/cf-metadata/standard_name.xml 
>>
>> being kept resonably up-to-date? 
>>
>> I'm thinking about using it to map to, eg DIF vocabulary. Has anyone 
>> else done any mappings like that?
>> _______________________________________________
>> CF-metadata mailing list
>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu <mailto:CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu> 
>> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC
>> is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents
>> of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless
>> it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to
>> NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CF-metadata mailing list
>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu <mailto:CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>
>> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------
> 
> Luis Bermudez Ph.D.
> 
> Software Engineer
> 
> MMI Liaison - http://marinemetadata.org
> 
> bermudez at mbari.org <mailto:bermudez at mbari.org>
> 
> Tel:  (831) 775-1929
> 
> Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
> 
> 
> 
> 



More information about the CF-metadata mailing list