UMBC ebiquity
Ontology Summit 2009: Toward Ontology-based Standards

Ontology Summit 2009: Toward Ontology-based Standards

Tim Finin, 6:41am 15 March 2009

A two day event, Ontology Summit 2009: Toward Ontology-based Standards, will be held 6-7 April 2009 at NIST in Gaithersburg MD. The Summit is co-organized by NIST and a number of other organizations and is part of NIST’s Interoperability week.

“This summit will address the intersection of two active communities, namely the technical standards world, and the community of ontology and semantic technologies. This intersection is long overdue because each has much to offer the other. Ontologies represent the best efforts of the technical community to unambiguously capture the definitions and interrelationships of concepts in a variety of domains. Standards — specifically information standards — are intended to provide unambiguous specifications of information, for the purpose of error-free access and exchange. If the standards community is indeed serious about specifying such information unambiguously to the best of its ability, then the use of ontologies as the vehicle for such specifications is the logical choice. Conversely, the standards world can provide a large market for the industrial use of ontologies, since ontologies are explicitly focused on the precise representation of information. This will be a boost to worldwide recognition of the utility and power of ontological models. The goal of this Ontology Summit 2009 is to articulate the power of synergizing these two communities in the form of a communique in which a number of concrete challenges can be laid out. These challenges could serve as a roadmap that will galvanize both communities and bring this promising technical area to the attention of others.”

The meeting is free, but advanced registration by March 31 is required. You can also register to participate remotely.


One Response to “Ontology Summit 2009: Toward Ontology-based Standards”

  1. Lisa Says:

    Is anyone attending?



  • something went wrong