Data food consortium

Yes. We've had some conversations with them in ValueFlows, and want to try a translation from the VF vocabulary to DataFood and back. Haven't had time to do it yet.

hey bob ,it could be a great use case for the BabelFish module
do you have their ontology ?

Tibor, that is exactly what we have in mind. Their ontology has been published, we have had some conversations with the people who developed it, and one of the VF contributors was involved in some way.

All we need is some time...;-) We've been buried in other projects.

Tibor, that is exactly what we have in mind.

I was sure you'd say that ;)
Their ontology has been published, we have had some conversations with the people who developed it, and one of the VF contributors was involved in some way.
Cool it could be fairly easy to go both ways , first we could produce VF ontology from ph pivot language then food onto
Then the other way round would be a piece of cake

All we need is some time…;-) We’ve been buried in other projects

No worries , that seems to be the story of our lives , exactly the same here

Cool it could be fairly easy to go both ways , first we could produce VF ontology from ph pivot language then food onto Then the other way round would be a piece of cake

I'm definitely game to do this, and really happy to see you pop into the thread @tiborkatelbach ! But I'm not sure it will be a piece of cake ;) .... We will need the pivot to include relationships. And while I think going from food to valueflows will be pretty easy, I think going from valueflows (more generic) to food (more specific) will be harder. I have some ideas, but I'm not sure they will work...

Hoping to get un-buried soon, but may not happen for a while...

always a pleasure and always reading here ;)
I can only say , it might be a good use case to test and enhance our stuff
indeed relations can be problematic but not a blocker
we could proceed in a sprint, one or two session of 1h or 2h dedicated could be enough
at least to start the locomotive :)

OK, let's try it then! I agree nothing we have is a blocker.

I have to look back at where we left it, my memory is never the best. I know I would like a diagram from you on the pivot data structure. :)

And I could try to do a mapping of VF to the food ontology.

Or, is there a better way we can work together in a sprint? Sit together and try to map all three?

OK, let’s try it then! I agree nothing we have is a blocker.

I have to look back at where we left it, my memory is never the best. I know I would like a diagram from you on the pivot data structure. :)

my fail , I'll produce it for the session for sure

And I could try to do a mapping of VF to the food ontology.

Or, is there a better way we can work together in a sprint? Sit together and try to map all three?

at least for the first run to prepare an action plan then we can do our thing independently

When? Before or after the holidays? Could be either for us I think. We are usually flexible except Mondays. We are in US CST, like Chicago.

I'm in, but before we do it, I'll ask some questions about the DataFood ontology...

[update] https://github.com/datafoodconsortium/ontology/issues/2

it could be a session next week ​? when's a good day for you ?

Tuesday or Friday for us.

Tuesday could be good
is 11h CET good for you ?

We are 7 hours before CET, so I think 14h CET at the earliest, a bit later if you can.

ok that could work

OK, to wrap up, this is a working session to kick off automating the vocabulary translation between ValueFlows and the datafoodconsortium vocab. Me, Bob, Tibor at the moment. 2pm CET / 7am CST on Tuesday Dec. 12. Online somewhere. Does anyone else want to be involved? Will be a technically oriented working session.

Hi there ! Following the conversation here https://github.com/datafoodconsortium/ontology/issues/2 I would suggest you to map the last version of the DFC business ontology as it has changed quite a lot since the first version we published. But e have not yet put it in the owl file so we have not yet published it, we should do that in January or February (I'm in Australia with the OFN crew at the moment so not much time). And happy to have a call with you if needs be next week :-)

@myriamboure ! So good to meet you in yet another place! We're having some kind of conversation at 14h CET tomorrow. Seems better to me to map to the new version if possible, but I could be persuaded otherwise. Can you join the conversation then? I think details will be forthcoming here

Hi @myriamboure ! Yes great to see you here! And happy to see that lovely colorful diagram. :)

I want to make sure I understand: are you saying the vocabulary is stable but not yet in owl/rdf format? Or that it is also not stable (whatever format it ends up in)?

If the first, we can go ahead I think. This whole process is pretty experimental anyhow; ValueFlows is stable in some parts, and not even done in other parts; the translation software is in progress too. So as long as we understand the status of all the different parts, I don't think it is a problem to give it a try and see what kinds of problems we run into. At least we should learn something.

You definitely need to map the new version @bobhaugen and @lynnfoster, it is not completely stable but I think it's almost, so it should be just minor changes for now. Well at least it has not changed in the last iterations / instanciations, but you know, that's an iterative process so we never really know until when it is stable ;-)
Lynne the owl/rdf format is out of date, so anyway don't use it. So the concepts and relationships model is pretty stable as I say, but the vocabulary might change a bit if we find better terms to describe the concepts and relationships we have captured here.
I can't be there tomorrow as 14:00 is midnight for me and I'll be sleeping :-(

@lynnfoster @bobhaugen is it now ?
https://appear.in/communecter

Hi everyone, we just met for a bit. In terms of this thread, we're going to hold off on the mapping of data food ontology and valueflows for now, and start smaller with agent (person, organization/group) and getting Tibor's mapping code working between our apps, and in a way that others can add themselves in. So @myriamboure no pressure, let's see where you all are at when we get that smaller piece working. And thanks again for chiming in so quickly and helpfully here! We'll ping again!