Some of the points brought up by Ken Bagstad @ USGS regarding the US Semantic Technologies Symposium (http://us2ts.org/):
- Strong emphasis on ontology development than application, but limited mentioning of geo-semantics in the plenary track.
- Constant calls for more tools but no inventory of existing tools, strengths/weaknesses, and how they “might be built”.
The context to raise this issue: does the community (ESIP) have a clear big picture goals that goes beyond the ESIP bylaws?
Tools mentioned in Ken Bagstad’s email include:
- SWEET
- COR
- BioPortal and CEDAR (by John)
- k.LAB and Integrated Modelling
Spatial Thinking 
Ruth followed up on the email thread, highlighting that “neither the science community nor the development community is really ready to play or even interested in the details of semantics beyond the simple things like schema.org tags on webpages.”
LikeLike