ISO 15926 as OWL June 25th 2012

Time: 2012-06-25, 3.30PM-4.30PM
Venue: Web meeting
Chair: Lillian Hella
Minutes: Lillian Hella
Present: Victor Agroskin, Rob DeCarlo, David Leal, David Price, Martin Giese, Onno Paap, Geiza Hamazaki, Gabriel Lopes and Lillian Hella


  1. Approval of agenda
  2. Change in MoM from last meeting
  3. Status
  4. Clarification of scope and proposal for how to split up the work
  5. Title of the project
  6. Next meeting
  7. A.O.B

Minutes of Meetings

1. Approval of agenda

2. Change in MoM from last meeting
Correction: The existing PCA OWL files are available in OWL DL.

3. Status
No actual work has been done since the last introductory meeting. The last meeting was in conjunction with PCA SIG meetings and the MMT SIG in particular. Therefore, also other people participated. Here is an overview of people that has shown interest in the OWL2 project:

  • Alan Doniger
  • Victor Agroskin
  • Hans Teijgeler
  • Rob DeCarlo
  • David Leal
  • David Price
  • Arild Waaler
  • Geiza Hamazaki
  • Gabriel Lopes
  • Koos Strydom
  • Kari Anne Haaland Thorsen
  • Johan Klüwer
  • Martin Giese
  • Ian Glendinning
  • Onno Paap
  • Magne Valen-Sendstad
  • Lillian Hella

4. Clarification of scope and proposal for how to split up the work
During the last meeting it was clear that the group needs to have a shared view of where we are and what we should do. In the proposal it is stated: “To develop OWL2 representations of ISO 15926-2 suitable for use in the development of industrial ontologies based on the upper ontology of ISO 15926-2, using currently recognized best-practice methods of OWL ontology development.”

This needs to be more specific, and we need to work with limiting the scope and clarification of it. Based on the discussions in the meeting, more work will be needed for this clarification. This will be put in a scope document that will be created. Documentation will be stored and published at a wiki page on the PCA wiki (when we have decided about a name for the project). Forum for discussions is available at: (user name and password required)

It has been proposed to split the work in smaller parts. Rather than aiming to solve it all, the focus should be on smaller, doable tasks that will have an effect. Starting small, we can always extend and add more later. How the work can be split up has been discussed, but nothing has been concluded yet. One proposal is to extract parts of Part 2 (e.g. 4D - There are statements in Part 4 that do not need any part of Part 2 to be represented in OWL). A possible way of limiting scope: going through the entities of Part 2 and reduce the number (end up with less than 100, e.g. 50). Then we have a basic vocabulary, and can focus on an initial task to make a selected subset available in OWL2. The full set of entities is actually not used for reference data. We have the possibility to use EPIM resources for validation of the selected entities (comparing with the EPIM ReportingHub project). To do: Have a clear use case.

The relationship to other parts could be an issue, but can also be left out and only focus on Part 2. Life cycle issues do not need to be taken into account now. Should consider the possibility to isolate a result of the projects and use it alongside the other available sources of ISO 15926. Should also consider to try to make ISO 15926 and traditional SW technology and tools blend together. There are other ways of doing tings outside the ISO 15926 environment, e.g. recognized in the W3C environment, that should be acknowledged and used in the process.

Before the next meeting more information about other activities related to ISO 15926 will be available, and this will be useful in our work to be clearer on our scope and avoid overlap with other activities. It will be easier to conclude when we have something more concrete. Coordination with related activities needs to be done (JORD and MMT SIG). How does our work fit with the work done in the JORD project and the work they are doing now? It will be useful to have someone to present JORD and what they are doing now related to this project. More information about JORD is available at:

And more information about the work of the MMT SIG (also using forum – it is free to join forum) available at:

5. Title of the project
ISO 15926 is already represented in OWL, and we should have a more suitable name. Suggestions:

  • ISO 15926 for the semantic web
  • Relate it to general semantic web best practice
  • Best practice modelling of ISO 15926
  • ISO 15926 in OWL2

Full name of Part 7 and 8 is as follows (so that we do not overlap with any of the existing parts):

  • Part 7: Implementation methods for the integration of distributed systems: Template methodology
  • Part 8: Implementation methods for the integration of distributed systems: Web Ontology Language (OWL) implementation

Email proposals to Lillian, and we will decide on a name at the next meeting.

6. Next meeting
September 5th

7. A.O.B
No items proposed.

Action Items

Action 12.03: Send information about wiki/forum possibilities to the group (Lillian)
Action 12.04: Send title proposals to Lillian (all)
Action 12.05: Ask Johan is he has a white paper or similar related to this project (Lillian)
Action 12.06: Collect scope from MMT SIG (Lillian)
Action 12.07: Ask Ian to give a JORD presentation at the next meeting (Lillian)

About PCA
Reference Data Services