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

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

From: Kei Cheung <kei.cheung@yale.edu>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 15:22:57 -0400
To: samwald@gmx.at
Cc: Eric Jain <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>, public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Message-id: <467D7311.3030802@yale.edu>

Just want to continue the story a little bit: "...Unarguably, this 
environment of creative chaos has greatly enriched the field. But it has 
also created a significant hindrance to researchers wishing to exploit 
the wealth of data to its fullest..."

Compare the old map of Italy:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/02/Italy_1050.jpg

with the modern map of Italy:

http://www.italy-weather-and-maps.com/italy/maps/italymap2.php

There are now fewer states which are called provinces (may be analogous 
to the transformation of databases to global ontologies). There is a web 
of train routes/highways (may be analogous to URI's, mapping etc) 
connecting different provinces (Silicia is now connected to the 
mainland). Let alone common currencies are being used and Bioinformatics 
conferences (e.g., NETTAB) were/will be held in Italy.

-Kei

samwald@gmx.at wrote:

>>The metaphor is clearly flawed, or else surely UniProt would be depicted
>>in 
>>the center :-)
>>    
>>
>
>:) We will see, this is just a quick sketch do demonstrate the idea for the graphics. Uniprot (and protein / gene resources in general) might indeed end up being positioned at the center, at least of the 'life science' areas. The 'health care' information resources make less use of it at the moment.
>
>  
>
>>Does a simple
>>HTTP-based 
>>resolver count as a "mapping file"?
>>    
>>
>
>That depends on what the resolver is doing. If we can resolve a URI and get back an RDF graph that contains triples involving the same URI, then yes. If it only allows us to get back some related stuff (e.g. HTML pages), then we don't have a connection of two RDF resources and cannot draw a connection.
>
>  
>
>>Also, a resource such as UniProt, while focussed on proteins, has various 
>>    
>>
>
>If a single resource deals with two related kinds of information (arbitrary example: genes and proteins), then I will try to position it on the border between those two areas.
>In the rare cases where this should not be possible, the representation of the ontology is split and the two sub-ontologies are shown as separate entities.
>
>cheers,
>Matthias
>
>
>
>
>
>.
>
>  
>
Received on Saturday, 23 June 2007 19:23:13 GMT

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