- From: Peter DeVries <pete.devries@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 18:58:43 -0500
- To: public-lod@w3.org
- Cc: Jim Balhoff <balhoff@nescent.org>, Matt <diapriid@gmail.com>, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, Chris Mungall <cjmungall@lbl.gov>, Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, andy_deans@ncsu.edu, Nathan Wilson <nwilson@eol.org>, David Patterson <dpatterson@mbl.edu>, Anne Thessen <athessen@mbl.edu>
- Message-ID: <CAE0MQeEZgsczYHjru+jy9qyVX=Vzt7mK99gS-zO4iPrB5GATXQ@mail.gmail.com>
To spare others from having to to through the entire OBO ontology thread, I thought it would be helpful to make a more digestible summary. I went to the page that the Hymenoptera Ontology Paper said was the site for the ontology. A Gross Anatomy Ontology for Hymenoptera http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0015991 *"The HAO OBO file is available at http://www.obofoundry.org/cgi-bin/detail​.cgi?id=hymenoptera_anatomy. "* That OWL ontology had URI's like this http://purl.org/obo/owl/HAO_0000144 OBO now has moved to a different scheme at http://obi-ontology.org/page/Main_Page Which has URI's like this http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/HAO_0000144 I imported both the old ontology and the new ontology into my SPARQL endpoint by placing the URI's for each into my list of imported schema. At the time it was not clear to me that all of the obo ontologies are supposed to be at these new URI's and that the Hymenoptera ontology page above had not been fixed to point to the new ontology. You can look at one of the current HAO ontologie URI's within the my KB (virtuoso) http://bit.ly/wNsnBY ( Some details you can skip and come back to later) * This is after running Kingsley's isparql script to add the wdrs:describedby links back to the ontology itself. This ties each term back to the ontology that defines it. Note in the LOD it is possible to have a URI and not automatically know where it is defined. I also do this when I make a statement about a URI defined somewhere else so I can get back to the RDF where that statement was made. For instance some of the separate RDF or RDFa files that make statement about GNI names e.g Statements about the GNI Name Plasmodium malariae Feletti and Grassi 1889 http://bit.ly/wWN8rW () Also note in the KB view there are still blank nodes like *nodeID://b591845 * This is the result of a links to non-global URIs. If you look at the ontology file itself you will see that it has axioms on these terms, but the axioms themselves don't have URI's. So far we have two issues: 1) The ontology should have wdrs:describedby or rdfs:isDefinedBy? statements in the owl file. 2) The axioms should have global URI's (I think - Alan might have a different opinion) The next issue is, does this vocabulary work on the LOD as it is expected. (At a minimum following TBL's 4 rules) e.g. If I ask for the machine interpretable definition of a term - do I get back machine interpretable information? One way to test this is to do the following: curl -H "Accept: application/rdf+xml" http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/HAO_0000144 and see if you get back appropriate RDF. Currently the HAO does not do this. (They are working on it) Another way to check if it is checking this is to use the Vapour Validator Service (http://validator.linkeddata.org/vapour) to see if HAO returns info by any of the proper ways. If you put in the HAO URI *http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/HAO_0000144* It fails, My comparison if you put in the txn Honey Bee URI * http://lod.taxonconcept.org/ses/z9oqP#Species* it works (I thought it would help to see what it looks like when it works) The Sindice Inspector Tools is also a good thing to use to check this http://sindice.com/ Issue #3 is that HAO at present does not follow Tim Burners-Lee's 3 rule ( http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html) 3) When someone looks up a URI, provide useful information, using the standards (RDF*, SPARQL) It looks as if the HAO people are working on fixing this. In summary. A) The whole issue of *http://purl.org/obo/owl/HAO_0000144* vs * http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/HAO_0000144* is because we were talking about different files. B) The things at *http://purl.obolibrary.org/ *are OWL (I will let someone else say what kind of OWL) C) There are three issues still outstanding 1) Statements in the OWL file that tie the individual items back to the ontology (wdrs:describedby or rdfs:isDefinedBy?) 2) The ontologies axioms are blank nodes 3) Properly following TML's 3rd rule. Why is the 3rd part important? Because when a service sees one of these terms used it needs to look it up to see how to properly deal with it. This is the semantic web right? For instance, Sindice and Sig.ma etc. know that a txn:Taxonomist is a dbpedia:Scientist which is a foaf:Person * Where possible I try to define my classes and predicates as subclasses or subproperties of other well known URI's I might have written something wrong or potentially debatable above , but my hope is that this does not start another 50 message thread :-) Respectfully, - Pete ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pete DeVries Department of Entomology University of Wisconsin - Madison 445 Russell Laboratories 1630 Linden Drive Madison, WI 53706 Email: pdevries@wisc.edu TaxonConcept <http://www.taxonconcept.org/> & GeoSpecies<http://about.geospecies.org/> Knowledge Bases A Semantic Web, Linked Open Data <http://linkeddata.org/> Project --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 23:59:12 UTC