Re: Domain specific ontologies in the sciences

> Term collision

I believe this is handled pretty well, as terms are always defined in 
specific namespaces. Hence my:Gene is not necessarily equivalent to 
your:Gene (though we could state that it is).


> Specific vs. general use

It is possible to define my:association as an rdfs:subPropertyOf of some 
more general property. I do see the problem that you may end up having 
to define special sets of terms for every paper...


> Polymorphic definitions

As pointed out above, my:Gene may be your junk DNA. While the problem 
can be solved by using different namespaces for different definitions of 
a term, how do you describe precisely how two definitions differ? This 
can be difficult, even when done in an informal way.