W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > June 2007

Re: RE: RE: [hcls] A map of the Semantic Web for life science and health care

From: <samwald@gmx.at>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 22:33:45 +0200
Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Message-ID: <20070622203345.310060@gmx.net>
To: "Kashyap, Vipul" <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG>

Hello Vipul,

> And maybe we need to brainstorm around what the goal of this would be as
> well?

The goal of this is to give a CONCRETE overview of the things that have been DONE for the Semantic Web in the HCLS domain. 

The entities in this map are the actual RDF/OWL datasources (e.g Uniprot RDF, the BAMS OWL file), that we have at the moment -- NOT something we are planning to do, or would like to do, or which might be useful. There is nothing to be confused about here.

The connections between these entities represent actual mappings / relations between these ontologies. If there are several RDF triples reaching from one ontology to the other, we draw a connection. If there are no such triples there is no connection. Again, this is intended to be very concrete.

What I want to avoid is to create something that contains the word 'vision', or that simply gives a general overview of how health care and life science work, without giving any clear idea of what actually has practically been done with RDF/OWL at the moment. We want to show which parts of our fraction of the Semantic Web work, and we also want to be honest about which parts don't work so well, are fragmented or at a relatively early stage.


>here are a bunch of “maps” a categorization of which I have put on the wiki:

> Ecosystem Diagrams

I like the "ecosystem" metaphor, but none of the diagrams depict any kind of ecosystem. The "HCLS ecosystem" map is actually a tube map depicting data flow. We should try to apply our metaphors consistently, which I tried with the current proposal.

> Spheres of Activity Diagrams

A map showing the institutions involved would in the development processes of our SW resources would be interesting. This could be reflected in another map (maybe with the same layout, but different labels etc.)

> Data Flow Maps

The current SW ontologies are hardly used in practice, so we cannot demonstrate a data flow map that is specific to SW. A general data flow map for the Health Care and Life Science area is probably not the goal (and already exists). Some of the data flow is probably already hinted on by the RDF connections between ontologies. 

> Knowledge Flow Maps

Again, this would not be SW - specific and probably exists already. Giving a hypothetical example of how different persons would use ontologies would be interesting. 

>Taxonomies

Covered by the current map.

Thanks for your feedback!


cheers,
Matthias Samwald

----------

Yale Center for Medical Informatics, New Haven /
Section on Medical Expert and Knowledge-Based Systems, Vienna /
http://neuroscientific.net



.


-- 
Ist Ihr Browser Vista-kompatibel? Jetzt die neuesten 
Browser-Versionen downloaden: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/browser
Received on Friday, 22 June 2007 20:34:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:00:48 GMT