- From: Egon Willighagen <egon.willighagen@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 21:48:34 +0200
- To: "Eric Neumann" <eneumann@teranode.com>
- Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Hi Eric, On 8/21/07, Eric Neumann <eneumann@teranode.com> wrote: > My question (without knowing the true scale of what you had) was simply to > see if a mechanism existed that told me "which molecules at OpenMolecules > are URI-resolvable as RDF?". There is no such list yet, but will put creating one on my TODO list. > I guess having a master list that points to each (your second option) would > be easiest to use. ANother way to put it, would be to offfer an InChi (or > InChI URI) query service that either returned a compound if you had a record > of it, or said "Not Found". Right. The idea behind the service was to aggregate info from various resources about a certain molecule. The downside is that it will always returns something, the good thing is that it does not require an index to keep synchronized with external resources. > The curious thing of Compounds and InChI is that one can actually create > new URIs for any imaginable compound (i.e., not even stored) that are > resolvable as long as 1) the InChI syntax is correct, and 2) the structure > defined by the InChI is plausible. This has some interesting consequences > regarding virtualizing entities on the Semantic Web with structure content > simply by giving them a InChi URI... Indeed. Egon -- ---- http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2007 19:49:06 UTC