Date   

BEFORE MONDAY: Dietary requirements for participants with #physical presence in Barcelona #physical

Bo Weidema
 

Hi, all those of you who will be in Barcelona physically (#physical),

If you have special dietary requirements, please indicating those in a private mail to me (see the option below - no need to make that public :-)) before Monday 11th, please.

Best regards

Bo (Your #physical host in Barcelona)


Re: #softwaremethods Python library skeleton #softwaremethods

 

On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 21:41, tomas Navarrete <@tomas.navarrete> wrote:

Chris,

You mentionned CI scripts for conda packaging.
Pypi is to forget absolutely ?
No, but it is trivial to do. Ideally we wouldn't need conda (which is
great for complicated dependencies, but overkill for simple stuff) too
much. I already added twine to the basic requirements, for example.



--
############################
Chris Mutel
Technology Assessment Group, LEA
Paul Scherrer Institut
OHSA D22
5232 Villigen PSI
Switzerland
http://chris.mutel.org
Telefon: +41 56 310 5787
############################


Re: Start of the #ontology sub-group #ontology

Bo Weidema
 

Den 2019-03-07 kl. 02.19 skrev Elias Sebastian Azzi:

3) Decide on namespacing for the part of the ontology that is BONSAI-specific (i.e., which does not reside elsewhere): Suggestion to use purl.org - or bonsai.org - any other suggestions or arguments for one or the other?

I don't have any good pros and cons. Purl seems to be safest option in the long term?
- Bonsai: + enough for the hackaton;
- Purl: + good in the long-term, when bonsai becomes public; - someone needs to create an account

http://purl.org/linked-data/bonsai# is available

Makes sense. I will create an account.

Do we need to include in the ontology some of the thoughts you brought up in Weidema, B. P. et al. (2018) ‘On the boundary between economy and environment in life cycle assessment’, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 23(9), pp. 1839–1846. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1398-4

I think the definitions of "activities" and "flow-objects" are broad enough to cover both economy and environment, so this rather comes down to be a question of making the actual classification within each of these two dimensions complete enough.

Best regards

Bo


Re: Start of the #ontology sub-group #ontology

Elias Sebastian Azzi
 

3) Decide on namespacing for the part of the ontology that is BONSAI-specific (i.e., which does not reside elsewhere): Suggestion to use purl.org - or bonsai.org - any other suggestions or arguments for one or the other?

I don't have any good pros and cons. Purl seems to be safest option in the long term?
- Bonsai: + enough for the hackaton;
- Purl: + good in the long-term, when bonsai becomes public; - someone needs to create an account

http://purl.org/linked-data/bonsai# is available

3a) Create a "proper" ontology definition, based on the content of https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data-Storage#specify-minimum-core-data-and-metadata-formats - in the form of a picture like the one in the "minimal ontology pattern". Matteo suggests to use the vocabs QB and/or QB4OLAP for this. This also implies the creation of initial classifications for activities and flow-objects (including biosphere flows) as per https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data%20Integration#classifications-and-correspondence-tables - ensuring that we also include metadata for our testbench EXIOBASE dataset.

Do we need to include in the ontology some of the thoughts you brought up in Weidema, B. P. et al. (2018) ‘On the boundary between economy and environment in life cycle assessment’, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 23(9), pp. 1839–1846. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1398-4 


Re: #bentso Bentso model development plans #bentso

Elias Sebastian Azzi
 

Account created, here https://transparency.entsoe.eu/homepageLogin
And API key requested by mail.

This done; I am not sure to be able to contribute more than that for now.


Re: Request for help: Python library skeleton

tomas Navarrete
 

Chris,

You mentionned CI scripts for conda packaging.
Pypi is to forget absolutely ?


Re: Weekly Q&A with Chris

 

On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 22:39, Brandon Kuczenski <bkuczenski@...> wrote:
Hi all...
Speaking as someone working remotely (and someone who is just now making his way through the email queue), I want to bring up a few points. Number one, I am 9 hours delayed from CEST, which means that y'all will be starting your day at midnight Pacific time and probably wrapping up around 9am.
For me, I am a night owl so I will probably be able to overlap at the beginning and the very-end of your work days, but I'm afraid I cannot go full nocturnal for the week. So I can be present for the morning scrum and the evening wrap-up (hopefully both will be on Zoom)

We also have a group of people in the Philippines, so you won't be the only one suffering!
 
One thing this suggests is that my work can be to review the progress of the day and offer recommendations and critiques.
(It would mean that I'm an ideal person to work on testing and CI, but unfortunately I do not feel like I have the skills to do that by myself)
Anyway, I am already feeling a bit lost and overwhelmed so hopefully the next 3 weeks will bring some organizing and clarity.
A question for the group: where should I do my planning for my portion of the project? I have been nominated by Chris to lead the "reproducibility" working group, and I accept. It is recommended to edit the repo README, but this seems like a bad place to put anything other than cursory details. Where are we doing the real planning? Perhaps the wiki that belongs to the github repo?

You and the other group members will have to decide this collectively, but it seems like a new repository would be a natural choice. We encourage the use of Github project management tools like issues and the project board, to enhance transparency and allow others to more easily jump in and see a place they could quickly contribute.


Re: Weekly Q&A with Chris

Brandon Kuczenski
 

Hi all...
Speaking as someone working remotely (and someone who is just now making his way through the email queue), I want to bring up a few points. Number one, I am 9 hours delayed from CEST, which means that y'all will be starting your day at midnight Pacific time and probably wrapping up around 9am.
For me, I am a night owl so I will probably be able to overlap at the beginning and the very-end of your work days, but I'm afraid I cannot go full nocturnal for the week. So I can be present for the morning scrum and the evening wrap-up (hopefully both will be on Zoom)
One thing this suggests is that my work can be to review the progress of the day and offer recommendations and critiques.
(It would mean that I'm an ideal person to work on testing and CI, but unfortunately I do not feel like I have the skills to do that by myself)
Anyway, I am already feeling a bit lost and overwhelmed so hopefully the next 3 weeks will bring some organizing and clarity.
A question for the group: where should I do my planning for my portion of the project? I have been nominated by Chris to lead the "reproducibility" working group, and I accept. It is recommended to edit the repo README, but this seems like a bad place to put anything other than cursory details. Where are we doing the real planning? Perhaps the wiki that belongs to the github repo?

Thanks,
Brandon


On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 6:41 AM <miguel.astudillo@...> wrote:

Dear all,

 

I don’t have the notes with me but I can tell that the call was brief (we where only 4). Here is what I remember.

 

Working remotely: We talked a bit about how it could work for people volunteering remotely. I think the idea is that everybody is welcome to collaborate to the extent that they feel like. But if you commit to help, try to finish your task, so other tasks of the hackathon depending on it don’t get blocked. We also mentioned that it could be good to do a zoom call at the end of each day to summarise what has been going on.

 

Data formats: some of the data in the google drive of bonsai is on google spreadsheets. We talked about convert them to a machine-readable format and move them from there. The frictionless data package (https://frictionlessdata.io/) was proposed. We want people to facilitate the collaboration, and formats like csv are quite accessible to a wide public.

 

Best, Miguel

 

From: hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io <hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io> On Behalf Of Tiago Morais
Sent: 02 March 2019 14:35
To: hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io
Subject: Re: [hackathon2019] Weekly Q&A with Chris

 

Dear all,

 

This is a great ideia!

Unfortunately I also missed yesterday’s zoom call.

 

As Massimo mentioned, would be very nice have a quick summary.

 

Regards

Tiago

--
Tiago G. Morais
Instituto Superior Técnico - Universidade de Lisboa/University of Lisbon
MARETEC/LARSYS
Área Científica de Ambiente e Energia/Environment and Energy Scientific Area
Departamento de Engenharia Mecânica/Department of Mechanical Engineering 
Pavilhão de Mecânica I | Av. Rovisco Pais, 1 | 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal
Tel: +351 21 841 98 77 | ext. 3877

 

From: hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io <hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io> On Behalf Of Massimo Pizzol
Sent: 1 de março de 2019 14:45
To: hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io
Subject: Re: [hackathon2019] Weekly Q&A with Chris

 

Unfortunately I have missed today’s zoom (little last minute inconvenience).  Will you perhaps make a quick summary or share some notes? Some of the Q&A might be useful to others.

 

(In general, very good idea to schedule a fix weekly meeting! Thumbs up!)


Massimo

 

 

From: <hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io> on behalf of "Chris Mutel via Groups.Io" <cmutel@...>
Reply-To: "hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io" <hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io>
Date: Friday, 1 March 2019 at 12.22
To: "hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io" <hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io>
Subject: [hackathon2019] Weekly Q&A with Chris

 

Dear all-

I have scheduled a weekly Q&A session with myself for any questions or comments you might have at whatever stage your group is at. It will be every Friday at 15:00-15:30 CET, starting today, until the hackathon (i.e. 4 times). 

If you haven't used Zoom before, this is a chance to test it out before the hackathon starts.

-Chris

Chris Mutel is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

 

Topic: BONSAI Q&A

Time: Mar 1, 2019 3:00 PM Zurich

        Every week on Fri, 4 occurrence(s)

        Mar 1, 2019 3:00 PM

        Mar 8, 2019 3:00 PM

        Mar 15, 2019 3:00 PM

        Mar 22, 2019 3:00 PM

Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your calendar system.

 

Join Zoom Meeting

 

One tap mobile

+41225189006,,973425136# Switzerland

+41315280988,,973425136# Switzerland

 

Dial by your location

        +41 22 518 9006 Switzerland

        +41 31 528 0988 Switzerland

        +1 408 638 0968 US (San Jose)

        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)

Meeting ID: 973 425 136

Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/acD3QzOJCT

 



--
Brandon Kuczenski, Ph.D.
Associate Researcher

University of California at Santa Barbara
Institute for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Research
Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5131

email: bkuczenski@...


Getting started with #RDF (mute hashtag if this does not apply to you) #rdf

Agneta
 

Dear members of the #RDF subgroup

We will kick start a meeting on the tasks/ deliverables for this group. The agenda for the meeting:
1) Clarify the tasks between BONSAI ontology and RDF
2) Developing a conceptual RDF schema 

The meeting is set up on Zoom. Details below:
Topic: BONSAI RDF group

 

Time: Mar 8, 2019 10:00 AM Copenhagen

Join Zoom Meeting @

https://zoom.us/j/425952514


Re: #ontology elementary flows #ontology

Bo Weidema
 

Dear Chris,

I would agree when we are talking about really general issues such as time and geography, but for the truly core dimensions of the Industrial Ecology framework (activities and flow-objects, maybe also flow-properties and macro-economic scenarios), I think it is important to be able to accommodate new classes (and classifications) without the data provider having to go to a "foreign" site. I have no problem with sharing and cooperating such entries and correspondences with anyone, but that should happen "behind the scene" from a data provider perspective. At the current point in time, I would also try to limit the need for cooperating with other entities (incl. US government ones) that may delay the implementation. The whole idea of Linked Open Data is that everyone can do their "own thing" while still being accessible for everyone else.

Best regards

Bo

Den 2019-03-05 kl. 14.38 skrev Chris Mutel:

On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 13:22, Bo Weidema <bo.weidema@...> wrote:

In the end, it is not so important which list we choose initially, because any list will develop over time by having "same as" or class relations between different existing (and new) lists, e.g. ecoinvent, ILCD, USEPA, CICES and EXIOBASE, se also the description of the evolving classifications at https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data%20Integration#classifications-and-correspondence-tables


Thanks for this reminder that there is a lot of deep knowledge already in the wiki.

However, in this specific case, I think we have an alternative to building our own thing, as the US EPA is a) open to collaboration, b) also trying to match to at least some of the described lists. The ideal would be to be able to use the linked repo without any modification by BONSAI tools.

Best regards

Bo

Den 2019-03-05 kl. 12.58 skrev Chris Mutel:

I would suggest taking the US EPA flow list as the basis for the
BONSAI flow list - they have put in quite a lot of work in basing
their names and metadata on accepted standards and ontologies.

https://github.com/USEPA/Federal-LCA-Commons-Elementary-Flow-List.

The processing scripts aren't complete, but you can download the
current output here:
https://github.com/USEPA/Federal-LCA-Commons-Elementary-Flow-List/tree/master/fedelemflowlist/output

Wes said that they should have a complete 1.0 release in a few months.

On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 12:46, Bo Weidema <bo.weidema@...> wrote:
This message is for those who signed up for the ontology sub-group (Current members: Bo, Elias, Massimo); if this isn't you, you can mute the #ontology hashtag.

Based on the description by Chris and Matteo, I think the tasks for the ontology sub-group, to be distributed among us, is:

1) Upload task description for sub-group (do we need a project board?)

2) Coordinate tasks with sub-group on RDF (Agneta, Matteo) as it is not completely clear where the borderline between these two groups are

3) Decide on namespacing for the part of the ontology that is BONSAI-specific (i.e., which does not reside elsewhere): Suggestion to use purl.org - or bonsai.org - any other suggestions or arguments for one or the other?

3a) Create a "proper" ontology definition, based on the content of https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data-Storage#specify-minimum-core-data-and-metadata-formats - in the form of a picture like the one in the "minimal ontology pattern". Matteo suggests to use the vocabs QB and/or QB4OLAP for this. This also implies the creation of initial classifications for activities and flow-objects (including biosphere flows) as per https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data%20Integration#classifications-and-correspondence-tables - ensuring that we also include metadata for our testbench EXIOBASE dataset.

3b) Complement 3a) with an RDF schema, like in http://tcga.deri.ie/ or http://qweb.cs.aau.dk/qboairbase/

3c) Place output of 3a) and 3 b) on new github repo.

3d) Link from wiki to 3c) and provide also here any arguments for choices made or alternatives considered.

Bo


--


--
############################
Chris Mutel
Technology Assessment Group, LEA
Paul Scherrer Institut
OHSA D22
5232 Villigen PSI
Switzerland
http://chris.mutel.org
Telefon: +41 56 310 5787
############################
--


Re: #ontology elementary flows #ontology

 

On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 13:22, Bo Weidema <bo.weidema@...> wrote:

In the end, it is not so important which list we choose initially, because any list will develop over time by having "same as" or class relations between different existing (and new) lists, e.g. ecoinvent, ILCD, USEPA, CICES and EXIOBASE, se also the description of the evolving classifications at https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data%20Integration#classifications-and-correspondence-tables


Thanks for this reminder that there is a lot of deep knowledge already in the wiki.

However, in this specific case, I think we have an alternative to building our own thing, as the US EPA is a) open to collaboration, b) also trying to match to at least some of the described lists. The ideal would be to be able to use the linked repo without any modification by BONSAI tools.

Best regards

Bo

Den 2019-03-05 kl. 12.58 skrev Chris Mutel:

I would suggest taking the US EPA flow list as the basis for the
BONSAI flow list - they have put in quite a lot of work in basing
their names and metadata on accepted standards and ontologies.

https://github.com/USEPA/Federal-LCA-Commons-Elementary-Flow-List.

The processing scripts aren't complete, but you can download the
current output here:
https://github.com/USEPA/Federal-LCA-Commons-Elementary-Flow-List/tree/master/fedelemflowlist/output

Wes said that they should have a complete 1.0 release in a few months.

On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 12:46, Bo Weidema <bo.weidema@...> wrote:
This message is for those who signed up for the ontology sub-group (Current members: Bo, Elias, Massimo); if this isn't you, you can mute the #ontology hashtag.

Based on the description by Chris and Matteo, I think the tasks for the ontology sub-group, to be distributed among us, is:

1) Upload task description for sub-group (do we need a project board?)

2) Coordinate tasks with sub-group on RDF (Agneta, Matteo) as it is not completely clear where the borderline between these two groups are

3) Decide on namespacing for the part of the ontology that is BONSAI-specific (i.e., which does not reside elsewhere): Suggestion to use purl.org - or bonsai.org - any other suggestions or arguments for one or the other?

3a) Create a "proper" ontology definition, based on the content of https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data-Storage#specify-minimum-core-data-and-metadata-formats - in the form of a picture like the one in the "minimal ontology pattern". Matteo suggests to use the vocabs QB and/or QB4OLAP for this. This also implies the creation of initial classifications for activities and flow-objects (including biosphere flows) as per https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data%20Integration#classifications-and-correspondence-tables - ensuring that we also include metadata for our testbench EXIOBASE dataset.

3b) Complement 3a) with an RDF schema, like in http://tcga.deri.ie/ or http://qweb.cs.aau.dk/qboairbase/

3c) Place output of 3a) and 3 b) on new github repo.

3d) Link from wiki to 3c) and provide also here any arguments for choices made or alternatives considered.

Bo



    
--



--
############################
Chris Mutel
Technology Assessment Group, LEA
Paul Scherrer Institut
OHSA D22
5232 Villigen PSI
Switzerland
http://chris.mutel.org
Telefon: +41 56 310 5787
############################


Re: Start of the #ontology sub-group #ontology

Bo Weidema
 

Dear Agneta,

Yes, I think a joint meeting Friday would be good to clarify the boundary between the tasks of the two groups.

Bo

Den 2019-03-05 kl. 13.12 skrev Agneta:

Hi

Thanks for this message Bo.

Actually I am currently working on points 3a and 3b,- Using existing LCA ontology ( based on BONSAI wiki and Kuczenski et al (2016)) as a starting point to develop an RDF schema . 

So I am not entirely sure if there is much difference between the groups BONSAI ontology and an RDF framework.
Anyway, I am also developing a dummies guide to RDF and RDF schema for LCA practitioners.

Group members we have a meeting scheduled on Friday 8th March 10 AM so please let me know if you are interested in joining.

Regards

Agneta

--


Re: #ontology elementary flows #ontology

Bo Weidema
 

Dear Chris,

Thanks for this suggestion. This topic is also relevant for the "Correspondence files" group.

In the end, it is not so important which list we choose initially, because any list will develop over time by having "same as" or class relations between different existing (and new) lists, e.g. ecoinvent, ILCD, USEPA, CICES and EXIOBASE, se also the description of the evolving classifications at https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data%20Integration#classifications-and-correspondence-tables

For the hackathon, what is important is that we have included the classes from the lists (classifications) used by the actual data that we work with, so EXIOBASE and ENTSO as far as I understand.

Best regards

Bo

Den 2019-03-05 kl. 12.58 skrev Chris Mutel:

I would suggest taking the US EPA flow list as the basis for the
BONSAI flow list - they have put in quite a lot of work in basing
their names and metadata on accepted standards and ontologies.

https://github.com/USEPA/Federal-LCA-Commons-Elementary-Flow-List.

The processing scripts aren't complete, but you can download the
current output here:
https://github.com/USEPA/Federal-LCA-Commons-Elementary-Flow-List/tree/master/fedelemflowlist/output

Wes said that they should have a complete 1.0 release in a few months.

On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 12:46, Bo Weidema <bo.weidema@...> wrote:
This message is for those who signed up for the ontology sub-group (Current members: Bo, Elias, Massimo); if this isn't you, you can mute the #ontology hashtag.

Based on the description by Chris and Matteo, I think the tasks for the ontology sub-group, to be distributed among us, is:

1) Upload task description for sub-group (do we need a project board?)

2) Coordinate tasks with sub-group on RDF (Agneta, Matteo) as it is not completely clear where the borderline between these two groups are

3) Decide on namespacing for the part of the ontology that is BONSAI-specific (i.e., which does not reside elsewhere): Suggestion to use purl.org - or bonsai.org - any other suggestions or arguments for one or the other?

3a) Create a "proper" ontology definition, based on the content of https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data-Storage#specify-minimum-core-data-and-metadata-formats - in the form of a picture like the one in the "minimal ontology pattern". Matteo suggests to use the vocabs QB and/or QB4OLAP for this. This also implies the creation of initial classifications for activities and flow-objects (including biosphere flows) as per https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data%20Integration#classifications-and-correspondence-tables - ensuring that we also include metadata for our testbench EXIOBASE dataset.

3b) Complement 3a) with an RDF schema, like in http://tcga.deri.ie/ or http://qweb.cs.aau.dk/qboairbase/

3c) Place output of 3a) and 3 b) on new github repo.

3d) Link from wiki to 3c) and provide also here any arguments for choices made or alternatives considered.

Bo




--


Re: Start of the #ontology sub-group #ontology

Agneta
 

Hi

Thanks for this message Bo.

Actually I am currently working on points 3a and 3b,- Using existing LCA ontology ( based on BONSAI wiki and Kuczenski et al (2016)) as a starting point to develop an RDF schema . 

So I am not entirely sure if there is much difference between the groups BONSAI ontology and an RDF framework.
Anyway, I am also developing a dummies guide to RDF and RDF schema for LCA practitioners.

Group members we have a meeting scheduled on Friday 8th March 10 AM so please let me know if you are interested in joining.

Regards

Agneta


Re: Start of the #ontology sub-group #ontology

 

I would suggest taking the US EPA flow list as the basis for the
BONSAI flow list - they have put in quite a lot of work in basing
their names and metadata on accepted standards and ontologies.

https://github.com/USEPA/Federal-LCA-Commons-Elementary-Flow-List.

The processing scripts aren't complete, but you can download the
current output here:
https://github.com/USEPA/Federal-LCA-Commons-Elementary-Flow-List/tree/master/fedelemflowlist/output

Wes said that they should have a complete 1.0 release in a few months.

On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 12:46, Bo Weidema <bo.weidema@...> wrote:

This message is for those who signed up for the ontology sub-group (Current members: Bo, Elias, Massimo); if this isn't you, you can mute the #ontology hashtag.

Based on the description by Chris and Matteo, I think the tasks for the ontology sub-group, to be distributed among us, is:

1) Upload task description for sub-group (do we need a project board?)

2) Coordinate tasks with sub-group on RDF (Agneta, Matteo) as it is not completely clear where the borderline between these two groups are

3) Decide on namespacing for the part of the ontology that is BONSAI-specific (i.e., which does not reside elsewhere): Suggestion to use purl.org - or bonsai.org - any other suggestions or arguments for one or the other?

3a) Create a "proper" ontology definition, based on the content of https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data-Storage#specify-minimum-core-data-and-metadata-formats - in the form of a picture like the one in the "minimal ontology pattern". Matteo suggests to use the vocabs QB and/or QB4OLAP for this. This also implies the creation of initial classifications for activities and flow-objects (including biosphere flows) as per https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data%20Integration#classifications-and-correspondence-tables - ensuring that we also include metadata for our testbench EXIOBASE dataset.

3b) Complement 3a) with an RDF schema, like in http://tcga.deri.ie/ or http://qweb.cs.aau.dk/qboairbase/

3c) Place output of 3a) and 3 b) on new github repo.

3d) Link from wiki to 3c) and provide also here any arguments for choices made or alternatives considered.

Bo

--
############################
Chris Mutel
Technology Assessment Group, LEA
Paul Scherrer Institut
OHSA D22
5232 Villigen PSI
Switzerland
http://chris.mutel.org
Telefon: +41 56 310 5787
############################


Start of the #ontology sub-group #ontology

Bo Weidema
 

This message is for those who signed up for the ontology sub-group (Current members: Bo, Elias, Massimo); if this isn't you, you can mute the #ontology hashtag.

Based on the description by Chris and Matteo, I think the tasks for the ontology sub-group, to be distributed among us, is:

1) Upload task description for sub-group (do we need a project board?)

2) Coordinate tasks with sub-group on RDF (Agneta, Matteo) as it is not completely clear where the borderline between these two groups are

3) Decide on namespacing for the part of the ontology that is BONSAI-specific (i.e., which does not reside elsewhere): Suggestion to use purl.org - or bonsai.org - any other suggestions or arguments for one or the other?

3a) Create a "proper" ontology definition, based on the content of https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data-Storage#specify-minimum-core-data-and-metadata-formats - in the form of a picture like the one in the "minimal ontology pattern". Matteo suggests to use the vocabs QB and/or QB4OLAP for this. This also implies the creation of initial classifications for activities and flow-objects (including biosphere flows) as per https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bonsai/wiki/Data%20Integration#classifications-and-correspondence-tables - ensuring that we also include metadata for our testbench EXIOBASE dataset.

3b) Complement 3a) with an RDF schema, like in http://tcga.deri.ie/ or http://qweb.cs.aau.dk/qboairbase/

3c) Place output of 3a) and 3 b) on new github repo.

3d) Link from wiki to 3c) and provide also here any arguments for choices made or alternatives considered.

Bo


#bentso Bentso model development plans #bentso

 

This message is for those who signed up for the bentso model development group; if this isn't you, you can mute the #bentso hashtag.

I have added a project board here: https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/bentso/projects/1, and am working on getting the library foundation set up. You are welcome to help (contact me bilaterally), but as you are all signed up for several projects, I think it is easiest if I do this before the hackathon, as I have it all in my head.

Before the hackathon, I will prepare the fundamentals: reading the ENTSO-E API. However, it is important that you apply for an API key now, as it can take some time if you are unlucky. Instructions are here: https://entsoe.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115000153663-Restful-API-first-steps-general-info-. You should test your key after you get it.


Re: Default BONSAI licenses

Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)
 

This is very nice!

Here some  pointers to material that may be of help:

https://creativecommons.org/ns
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Ontology_rights_and_licence#Comments_from_V.C3.ADctor_Rodr.C3.ADguez_Doncel
http://www.obofoundry.org/ontology/swo.html


Re: Default BONSAI licenses

 

Thanks Bo, this is a very good point! I have updated the language in the wiki slightly.


Re: IT requirements for the hackathon

Tom
 

Thanks Bo, good to know! I will try to pack a keyboard, mouse and laptop riser then, to work in comfort.