Topics

Post-hackathon ontology group #ontology #followup

Elias Sebastian Azzi
 

Hej allihop,

I guess all of us have an outline in mind for the ontology-related paper. Here is what I have in mind; I guess we can build on it, iterate and agree on a suitable structure and contents.
Not sure if groups.io is the best way to keep track of edits in the long run; not sure that google.drive suits everyone either; GitHub would be public; we use BOX.com internally.

INTRODUCTION

§ Paragraph IE

IE's object of study is SEM.

The accounting of social, environmental and economic flows in time and space.

Many fields of sustainability and decision-making towards sustainability rely on such accounting.

Several approaches can exist: MFA / LCA / IOA; but all share the same structure; despite different vocabularies/inconsistencies (ref).

Call to lift up IE methods: Reference to Pauliuk

Call to generalise: Bo, 2018

 

 

§ Paragraph CS

  • Ontology definition
  • Linked Data, Web of Data, background, e.g. in life sciences and what it has enabled
  • Open-source

 

§ IE and CS

Acknowledge previous efforts: LCA ontologies existing, IE GitHub repo open source,…

Still, as of today:

  • Conventional databases, ecoinvent; exiobase, have not yet made the move towards these flexible data structures.
  • Remains a challenge to have interoperability between databases
  • Validation of databases
  • Transparency of assumptions (constructs / system model)
  • Updates of databases

 

§ Bonsai organisation, strech goals, hackhathon

  • BONSAI organisation / Working rules / BEP process
  • Strech goals; highlight the sub-goal of the ontology group
  • Hackhathon, background info

 

§ Paper's aim

  • Describe the ontology developed, providing examples and possible extensions
  • Report on BEP process, main choices, alternatives left out + reproducability

 

§ Outline plan of article

[not sure an IMRaD structure is best suited, maybe better to have numbered section]

Section 2 = BEP process, rules, principles

Section 3 = Ontology description (link to online documentation)

Section 4 = Examples (unlinked, linked)

Section 5 = Advanced example, ideally with actual URIs, online;

Section 6 = Discussion of key choices, extensions per field, future enhancements, validation of rdfs

Section 7 = Conclusions, link to other working groups (e.g. correspondance tables, rdf triplestore)

 

SECTION 2  BEP process, rules, principles

Rules for agreeing; definition; BEPs

Principles:

  • Minimalist principle: core; complementary ontologies for different fields; extensions upcoming
  • On the distinction between A and B; for IA: atmospjhere as a process

 

SECTION 3 Ontology description

Table: 3 columns: Key vocabulary in the ontology; labels as in ontology; other usual names given in different fields (LCA, MFA, IOA, LCC, etc)

 

Figure: online viz of rdfs

 

§ Text description of:

  • Classes
  • Sub-classes
  • Properties, balanceable properties, …
  • Sub activities: market, transport, …

 

§ External ontologies

  • Measure, location,…

 

§ To add:

  • Uncertainty, …

 

 

EXAMPLE / APPLICATION [Section 4 , 5]

§ Current hosting of the ontology; examples are available at the URIs mentioned and on GitHubRepo

 

§ Several examples with figures, from simple to complex

Example Raw data; System model

Example with transport, market, impact assessment

 

DISCUSSION [based on BEPs, Section 6]

  • Validation [oops thing]
  • Why we have made certain choices
  • Alternatives left out
  • Reproducibility
  • Extensions: field specific extensions, agent theory (usually lacking in our field), linkages with other resources on WebOfData
  • Give one example of "re-use" by others of the ontology: accounting framework for Stockholm municipality (REFLOW project), how it fits in the ontology (or not) + ref to

 

CONCLUSIONS / VISION /EXTENSIONS [Section 7]

  • how we see them;
  • e.g. GDP, economic data
  • agent theory (unless we want to add it to the ontology right away)

 

 

Some references

 

(1)     Pauliuk, S.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Mutel, C. L.; Steubing, B.; Stadler, K. Lifting Industrial Ecology Modeling to a New Level of Quality and Transparency: A Call for More Transparent Publications and a Collaborative Open Source Software Framework. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19 (6), 937–949; DOI 10.1111/jiec.12316.

(2)     Pauliuk, S.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Müller, D. B. A General System Structure and Accounting Framework for Socioeconomic Metabolism. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19 (5), 728–741; DOI 10.1111/jiec.12306.

(3)     Pauliuk, S.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Müller, D. B.; Hertwich, E. G. Toward a Practical Ontology for Socioeconomic Metabolism. J. Ind. Ecol. 2016, 20 (6), 1260–1272; DOI 10.1111/jiec.12386.

(4)     Weidema, B. P.; Schmidt, J.; Fantke, P.; Pauliuk, S. On the Boundary between Economy and Environment in Life Cycle Assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2018, 23 (9), 1839–1846; DOI 10.1007/s11367-017-1398-4.

Bo Weidema
 

Thanks for taking the initiative. I find google.docs to be appropriate for this kind of work. If you prefer an open tool, a less advanced option is a riseup.pad

I would like to distinguish between the BONSAI core, which is what is absolutely needed to perform BONSAI footprints, and then have a separate add-on to enable its more general use in Industrial Ecology, mainly an expansion with the concepts of "stock", "assets" and "behavioural rules" linked to agents. All concepts need to be supported by actual data examples and validations.

Best regards

Bo

Den 2019-03-30 kl. 09.55 skrev Elias Sebastian Azzi:

Hej allihop,

I guess all of us have an outline in mind for the ontology-related paper. Here is what I have in mind; I guess we can build on it, iterate and agree on a suitable structure and contents.
Not sure if groups.io is the best way to keep track of edits in the long run; not sure that google.drive suits everyone either; GitHub would be public; we use BOX.com internally.

INTRODUCTION

§ Paragraph IE

IE's object of study is SEM.

The accounting of social, environmental and economic flows in time and space.

Many fields of sustainability and decision-making towards sustainability rely on such accounting.

Several approaches can exist: MFA / LCA / IOA; but all share the same structure; despite different vocabularies/inconsistencies (ref).

Call to lift up IE methods: Reference to Pauliuk

Call to generalise: Bo, 2018

 

 

§ Paragraph CS

  • Ontology definition
  • Linked Data, Web of Data, background, e.g. in life sciences and what it has enabled
  • Open-source

 

§ IE and CS

Acknowledge previous efforts: LCA ontologies existing, IE GitHub repo open source,…

Still, as of today:

  • Conventional databases, ecoinvent; exiobase, have not yet made the move towards these flexible data structures.
  • Remains a challenge to have interoperability between databases
  • Validation of databases
  • Transparency of assumptions (constructs / system model)
  • Updates of databases

 

§ Bonsai organisation, strech goals, hackhathon

  • BONSAI organisation / Working rules / BEP process
  • Strech goals; highlight the sub-goal of the ontology group
  • Hackhathon, background info

 

§ Paper's aim

  • Describe the ontology developed, providing examples and possible extensions
  • Report on BEP process, main choices, alternatives left out + reproducability

 

§ Outline plan of article

[not sure an IMRaD structure is best suited, maybe better to have numbered section]

Section 2 = BEP process, rules, principles

Section 3 = Ontology description (link to online documentation)

Section 4 = Examples (unlinked, linked)

Section 5 = Advanced example, ideally with actual URIs, online;

Section 6 = Discussion of key choices, extensions per field, future enhancements, validation of rdfs

Section 7 = Conclusions, link to other working groups (e.g. correspondance tables, rdf triplestore)

 

SECTION 2  BEP process, rules, principles

Rules for agreeing; definition; BEPs

Principles:

  • Minimalist principle: core; complementary ontologies for different fields; extensions upcoming
  • On the distinction between A and B; for IA: atmospjhere as a process

 

SECTION 3 Ontology description

Table: 3 columns: Key vocabulary in the ontology; labels as in ontology; other usual names given in different fields (LCA, MFA, IOA, LCC, etc)

 

Figure: online viz of rdfs

 

§ Text description of:

  • Classes
  • Sub-classes
  • Properties, balanceable properties, …
  • Sub activities: market, transport, …

 

§ External ontologies

  • Measure, location,…

 

§ To add:

  • Uncertainty, …

 

 

EXAMPLE / APPLICATION [Section 4 , 5]

§ Current hosting of the ontology; examples are available at the URIs mentioned and on GitHubRepo

 

§ Several examples with figures, from simple to complex

Example Raw data; System model

Example with transport, market, impact assessment

 

DISCUSSION [based on BEPs, Section 6]

  • Validation [oops thing]
  • Why we have made certain choices
  • Alternatives left out
  • Reproducibility
  • Extensions: field specific extensions, agent theory (usually lacking in our field), linkages with other resources on WebOfData
  • Give one example of "re-use" by others of the ontology: accounting framework for Stockholm municipality (REFLOW project), how it fits in the ontology (or not) + ref to

 

CONCLUSIONS / VISION /EXTENSIONS [Section 7]

  • how we see them;
  • e.g. GDP, economic data
  • agent theory (unless we want to add it to the ontology right away)

 

 

Some references

 

(1)     Pauliuk, S.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Mutel, C. L.; Steubing, B.; Stadler, K. Lifting Industrial Ecology Modeling to a New Level of Quality and Transparency: A Call for More Transparent Publications and a Collaborative Open Source Software Framework. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19 (6), 937–949; DOI 10.1111/jiec.12316.

(2)     Pauliuk, S.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Müller, D. B. A General System Structure and Accounting Framework for Socioeconomic Metabolism. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19 (5), 728–741; DOI 10.1111/jiec.12306.

(3)     Pauliuk, S.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Müller, D. B.; Hertwich, E. G. Toward a Practical Ontology for Socioeconomic Metabolism. J. Ind. Ecol. 2016, 20 (6), 1260–1272; DOI 10.1111/jiec.12386.

(4)     Weidema, B. P.; Schmidt, J.; Fantke, P.; Pauliuk, S. On the Boundary between Economy and Environment in Life Cycle Assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2018, 23 (9), 1839–1846; DOI 10.1007/s11367-017-1398-4.

--

Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)
 

Hi all,
I think all this discussion depends highly on the venue and on the "style" of paper.

I would like to send a paper to a semantic web venue, we can consider also a semantic web journal.

This is one that I would like to try

For this kind of paper I would use latex with overleaf, or through git.
In both cases I would move the practical discussion in private correspondence + slack among all those interested.

Kind regards,
Matteo



From: hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io [hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io] on behalf of Bo Weidema via Groups.Io [bo.weidema@...]
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 10:37 AM
To: hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io
Subject: Re: [hackathon2019] Post-hackathon ontology group #ontology #followup

Thanks for taking the initiative. I find google.docs to be appropriate for this kind of work. If you prefer an open tool, a less advanced option is a riseup.pad

I would like to distinguish between the BONSAI core, which is what is absolutely needed to perform BONSAI footprints, and then have a separate add-on to enable its more general use in Industrial Ecology, mainly an expansion with the concepts of "stock", "assets" and "behavioural rules" linked to agents. All concepts need to be supported by actual data examples and validations.

Best regards

Bo

Den 2019-03-30 kl. 09.55 skrev Elias Sebastian Azzi:

Hej allihop,

I guess all of us have an outline in mind for the ontology-related paper. Here is what I have in mind; I guess we can build on it, iterate and agree on a suitable structure and contents.
Not sure if groups.io is the best way to keep track of edits in the long run; not sure that google.drive suits everyone either; GitHub would be public; we use BOX.com internally.

INTRODUCTION

§ Paragraph IE

IE's object of study is SEM.

The accounting of social, environmental and economic flows in time and space.

Many fields of sustainability and decision-making towards sustainability rely on such accounting.

Several approaches can exist: MFA / LCA / IOA; but all share the same structure; despite different vocabularies/inconsistencies (ref).

Call to lift up IE methods: Reference to Pauliuk

Call to generalise: Bo, 2018

 

 

§ Paragraph CS

  • Ontology definition
  • Linked Data, Web of Data, background, e.g. in life sciences and what it has enabled
  • Open-source

 

§ IE and CS

Acknowledge previous efforts: LCA ontologies existing, IE GitHub repo open source,…

Still, as of today:

  • Conventional databases, ecoinvent; exiobase, have not yet made the move towards these flexible data structures.
  • Remains a challenge to have interoperability between databases
  • Validation of databases
  • Transparency of assumptions (constructs / system model)
  • Updates of databases

 

§ Bonsai organisation, strech goals, hackhathon

  • BONSAI organisation / Working rules / BEP process
  • Strech goals; highlight the sub-goal of the ontology group
  • Hackhathon, background info

 

§ Paper's aim

  • Describe the ontology developed, providing examples and possible extensions
  • Report on BEP process, main choices, alternatives left out + reproducability

 

§ Outline plan of article

[not sure an IMRaD structure is best suited, maybe better to have numbered section]

Section 2 = BEP process, rules, principles

Section 3 = Ontology description (link to online documentation)

Section 4 = Examples (unlinked, linked)

Section 5 = Advanced example, ideally with actual URIs, online;

Section 6 = Discussion of key choices, extensions per field, future enhancements, validation of rdfs

Section 7 = Conclusions, link to other working groups (e.g. correspondance tables, rdf triplestore)

 

SECTION 2  BEP process, rules, principles

Rules for agreeing; definition; BEPs

Principles:

  • Minimalist principle: core; complementary ontologies for different fields; extensions upcoming
  • On the distinction between A and B; for IA: atmospjhere as a process

 

SECTION 3 Ontology description

Table: 3 columns: Key vocabulary in the ontology; labels as in ontology; other usual names given in different fields (LCA, MFA, IOA, LCC, etc)

 

Figure: online viz of rdfs

 

§ Text description of:

  • Classes
  • Sub-classes
  • Properties, balanceable properties, …
  • Sub activities: market, transport, …

 

§ External ontologies

  • Measure, location,…

 

§ To add:

  • Uncertainty, …

 

 

EXAMPLE / APPLICATION [Section 4 , 5]

§ Current hosting of the ontology; examples are available at the URIs mentioned and on GitHubRepo

 

§ Several examples with figures, from simple to complex

Example Raw data; System model

Example with transport, market, impact assessment

 

DISCUSSION [based on BEPs, Section 6]

  • Validation [oops thing]
  • Why we have made certain choices
  • Alternatives left out
  • Reproducibility
  • Extensions: field specific extensions, agent theory (usually lacking in our field), linkages with other resources on WebOfData
  • Give one example of "re-use" by others of the ontology: accounting framework for Stockholm municipality (REFLOW project), how it fits in the ontology (or not) + ref to

 

CONCLUSIONS / VISION /EXTENSIONS [Section 7]

  • how we see them;
  • e.g. GDP, economic data
  • agent theory (unless we want to add it to the ontology right away)

 

 

Some references

 

(1)     Pauliuk, S.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Mutel, C. L.; Steubing, B.; Stadler, K. Lifting Industrial Ecology Modeling to a New Level of Quality and Transparency: A Call for More Transparent Publications and a Collaborative Open Source Software Framework. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19 (6), 937–949; DOI 10.1111/jiec.12316.

(2)     Pauliuk, S.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Müller, D. B. A General System Structure and Accounting Framework for Socioeconomic Metabolism. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19 (5), 728–741; DOI 10.1111/jiec.12306.

(3)     Pauliuk, S.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Müller, D. B.; Hertwich, E. G. Toward a Practical Ontology for Socioeconomic Metabolism. J. Ind. Ecol. 2016, 20 (6), 1260–1272; DOI 10.1111/jiec.12386.

(4)     Weidema, B. P.; Schmidt, J.; Fantke, P.; Pauliuk, S. On the Boundary between Economy and Environment in Life Cycle Assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2018, 23 (9), 1839–1846; DOI 10.1007/s11367-017-1398-4.

--

Massimo Pizzol
 

Thanks Elias

Good outline.

I would prefer using Goole docs for a draft. if this is to become a sci paper it can't be a public document but it should be accessible to contributors only and via invitation.

Massimo
--

Massimo Pizzol

DCEA | Department of Planning
Aalborg University (DK)

Phone: 45 9940 8369
Blog: moutreach.science

________________________________________
From: hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io [hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io] on behalf of Bo Weidema via Groups.Io [bo.weidema=bonsai.uno@groups.io]
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 10:37 AM
To: hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io
Subject: Re: [hackathon2019] Post-hackathon ontology group #ontology #followup

Thanks for taking the initiative. I find google.docs to be appropriate for this kind of work. If you prefer an open tool, a less advanced option is a riseup.pad

I would like to distinguish between the BONSAI core, which is what is absolutely needed to perform BONSAI footprints, and then have a separate add-on to enable its more general use in Industrial Ecology, mainly an expansion with the concepts of "stock", "assets" and "behavioural rules" linked to agents. All concepts need to be supported by actual data examples and validations.

Best regards

Bo

Den 2019-03-30 kl. 09.55 skrev Elias Sebastian Azzi:

Hej allihop,

I guess all of us have an outline in mind for the ontology-related paper. Here is what I have in mind; I guess we can build on it, iterate and agree on a suitable structure and contents.
Not sure if groups.io is the best way to keep track of edits in the long run; not sure that google.drive suits everyone either; GitHub would be public; we use BOX.com internally.

INTRODUCTION

§ Paragraph IE

IE's object of study is SEM.

The accounting of social, environmental and economic flows in time and space.

Many fields of sustainability and decision-making towards sustainability rely on such accounting.

Several approaches can exist: MFA / LCA / IOA; but all share the same structure; despite different vocabularies/inconsistencies (ref).

Call to lift up IE methods: Reference to Pauliuk

Call to generalise: Bo, 2018





§ Paragraph CS

* Ontology definition
* Linked Data, Web of Data, background, e.g. in life sciences and what it has enabled
* Open-source



§ IE and CS

Acknowledge previous efforts: LCA ontologies existing, IE GitHub repo open source,…

Still, as of today:

* Conventional databases, ecoinvent; exiobase, have not yet made the move towards these flexible data structures.
* Remains a challenge to have interoperability between databases
* Validation of databases
* Transparency of assumptions (constructs / system model)
* Updates of databases



§ Bonsai organisation, strech goals, hackhathon

* BONSAI organisation / Working rules / BEP process
* Strech goals; highlight the sub-goal of the ontology group
* Hackhathon, background info



§ Paper's aim

* Describe the ontology developed, providing examples and possible extensions
* Report on BEP process, main choices, alternatives left out + reproducability



§ Outline plan of article

[not sure an IMRaD structure is best suited, maybe better to have numbered section]

Section 2 = BEP process, rules, principles

Section 3 = Ontology description (link to online documentation)

Section 4 = Examples (unlinked, linked)

Section 5 = Advanced example, ideally with actual URIs, online;

Section 6 = Discussion of key choices, extensions per field, future enhancements, validation of rdfs

Section 7 = Conclusions, link to other working groups (e.g. correspondance tables, rdf triplestore)



SECTION 2 BEP process, rules, principles

Rules for agreeing; definition; BEPs

Principles:

* Minimalist principle: core; complementary ontologies for different fields; extensions upcoming
* On the distinction between A and B; for IA: atmospjhere as a process



SECTION 3 Ontology description

Table: 3 columns: Key vocabulary in the ontology; labels as in ontology; other usual names given in different fields (LCA, MFA, IOA, LCC, etc)



Figure: online viz of rdfs



§ Text description of:

* Classes
* Sub-classes
* Properties, balanceable properties, …
* Sub activities: market, transport, …



§ External ontologies

* Measure, location,…



§ To add:

* Uncertainty, …





EXAMPLE / APPLICATION [Section 4 , 5]

§ Current hosting of the ontology; examples are available at the URIs mentioned and on GitHubRepo



§ Several examples with figures, from simple to complex

Example Raw data; System model

Example with transport, market, impact assessment



DISCUSSION [based on BEPs, Section 6]

* Validation [oops thing]
* Why we have made certain choices
* Alternatives left out
* Reproducibility
* Extensions: field specific extensions, agent theory (usually lacking in our field), linkages with other resources on WebOfData
* Give one example of "re-use" by others of the ontology: accounting framework for Stockholm municipality (REFLOW project), how it fits in the ontology (or not) + ref to



CONCLUSIONS / VISION /EXTENSIONS [Section 7]

* how we see them;
* e.g. GDP, economic data
* agent theory (unless we want to add it to the ontology right away)





Some references



(1) Pauliuk, S.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Mutel, C. L.; Steubing, B.; Stadler, K. Lifting Industrial Ecology Modeling to a New Level of Quality and Transparency: A Call for More Transparent Publications and a Collaborative Open Source Software Framework. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19 (6), 937–949; DOI 10.1111/jiec.12316.

(2) Pauliuk, S.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Müller, D. B. A General System Structure and Accounting Framework for Socioeconomic Metabolism. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19 (5), 728–741; DOI 10.1111/jiec.12306.

(3) Pauliuk, S.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Müller, D. B.; Hertwich, E. G. Toward a Practical Ontology for Socioeconomic Metabolism. J. Ind. Ecol. 2016, 20 (6), 1260–1272; DOI 10.1111/jiec.12386.

(4) Weidema, B. P.; Schmidt, J.; Fantke, P.; Pauliuk, S. On the Boundary between Economy and Environment in Life Cycle Assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2018, 23 (9), 1839–1846; DOI 10.1007/s11367-017-1398-4.

--
[cid:part11.53D77068.B15291DB@...]

Bo Weidema
 

Fed konference-venue :-)

Bo

Den 2019-03-30 kl. 13.26 skrev Matteo Lissandrini (AAU):

This is one that I would like to try
--

Elias Sebastian Azzi
 

Hello,

Thanks for your input.

* You should have received an invitation, Google Drive file. Overleaf is interesting indeed; if a majority wants it, we can switch.

 

* Web Conference and paper format: to be settled collectively; next Zoom meeting is on Friday, right?

 

* Regarding, Bo's point on product footprint; then should add also background on the EU PEF that is soon to be released (in my understanding of the PEF policy, i.e. compulsory PEF to enter the EU market, demand for product foot printing is going to skyrocket in the coming years).

Have a nice week-end; amazing spring day in Stockholm; trees ready to burgeon; went to some seed exchange event: the garden will soon be full of plants. If you pass by Stockholm, let me know ;-)

Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)
 

Thanks  Elias,
I've added more info to the GDoc.

Enjoy the weather, hoping to meet soon :)

Cheers,
Matteo



From: hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io [hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io] on behalf of Elias Sebastian Azzi via Groups.Io [eazzi@...]
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 4:33 PM
To: hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io
Subject: Re: [hackathon2019] Post-hackathon ontology group #ontology #followup

Hello,

Thanks for your input.

* You should have received an invitation, Google Drive file. Overleaf is interesting indeed; if a majority wants it, we can switch.

 

* Web Conference and paper format: to be settled collectively; next Zoom meeting is on Friday, right?

 

* Regarding, Bo's point on product footprint; then should add also background on the EU PEF that is soon to be released (in my understanding of the PEF policy, i.e. compulsory PEF to enter the EU market, demand for product foot printing is going to skyrocket in the coming years).

Have a nice week-end; amazing spring day in Stockholm; trees ready to burgeon; went to some seed exchange event: the garden will soon be full of plants. If you pass by Stockholm, let me know ;-)

 

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 13:29, Massimo Pizzol <massimo@...> wrote:
I would prefer using Goole docs for a draft. if this is to become a sci paper it can't be a public document but it should be accessible to contributors only and via invitation.
Sorry to post something somewhat off-topic, but this statement is not
correct - peer-reviewed publications can absolutely be developed in
the open, and even some vintage pay-for-access journals such as ES&T
will allow you to publish pre-prints on e.g. archiv.org
(https://pubs.acs.org/page/esthag/submission/prior.html). As this
paper would be the supporting documentation for the choices and use of
the ontology, I would strongly recommend that it a) be developed in
the open, so that people can read up on its use, and any new changes
that you might make, and b) be submitted to an truly open access
journal such as ERL or PLOS One.

Massimo Pizzol
 

Thanks Chris

I don’t have any problem in publishing a preprint on archiv.org or similar open for comments, and prior to submission to a journal. But until this preprint is ready I am not comfortable in having a publicly accessible working paper, so my preference is still for a google docs with contributors only.

 

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: Sunday, 31 March 2019 at 11.20
To: "hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io" <hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [hackathon2019] Post-hackathon ontology group #ontology #followup

 

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 13:29, Massimo Pizzol <massimo@...> wrote:

I would prefer using Goole docs for a draft. if this is to become a sci paper it can't be a public document but it should be accessible to contributors only and via invitation.

 

Sorry to post something somewhat off-topic, but this statement is not

correct - peer-reviewed publications can absolutely be developed in

the open, and even some vintage pay-for-access journals such as ES&T

will allow you to publish pre-prints on e.g. archiv.org

paper would be the supporting documentation for the choices and use of

the ontology, I would strongly recommend that it a) be developed in

the open, so that people can read up on its use, and any new changes

that you might make, and b) be submitted to an truly open access

journal such as ERL or PLOS One.

 

 

 

Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)
 

I totally feel the same.
I always publish pre-prints on my personal page (not arxiv, I have issues with the use of arxiv nowadays)
and usually the confs/journal I submit to have open proceedings.

Cheers,
Matteo


From: hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io [hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io] on behalf of Massimo Pizzol via Groups.Io [massimo@...]
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2019 12:37 PM
To: hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io
Subject: Re: [hackathon2019] Post-hackathon ontology group #ontology #followup

Thanks Chris

I don’t have any problem in publishing a preprint on archiv.org or similar open for comments, and prior to submission to a journal. But until this preprint is ready I am not comfortable in having a publicly accessible working paper, so my preference is still for a google docs with contributors only.

 

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: Sunday, 31 March 2019 at 11.20
To: "hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io" <hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [hackathon2019] Post-hackathon ontology group #ontology #followup

 

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 13:29, Massimo Pizzol <massimo@...> wrote:

I would prefer using Goole docs for a draft. if this is to become a sci paper it can't be a public document but it should be accessible to contributors only and via invitation.

 

Sorry to post something somewhat off-topic, but this statement is not

correct - peer-reviewed publications can absolutely be developed in

the open, and even some vintage pay-for-access journals such as ES&T

will allow you to publish pre-prints on e.g. archiv.org

paper would be the supporting documentation for the choices and use of

the ontology, I would strongly recommend that it a) be developed in

the open, so that people can read up on its use, and any new changes

that you might make, and b) be submitted to an truly open access

journal such as ERL or PLOS One.