W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > January 2009

Re: [BioRDF] BioSIOC / aTag task

From: Tim Clark <twclark@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 13:57:45 -0500
Cc: Matthias Samwald <samwald@gmx.at>, public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Message-Id: <66E7BF53-F789-4231-B8B3-942D529C599F@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
To: Kei Cheung <kei.cheung@yale.edu>

That sounds positive, and I was glad to hear that Matthias is  
committed to working synergistically as well.

Tim
On Jan 7, 2009, at 1:55 PM, Kei Cheung wrote:

> Hi Matthias, Tim,
>
> I'll be happy to work with both of you to establish synergistic  
> activities between BioRDF and Scientific Discourse task forces. I  
> think it might be better coordinated if Tim and I first discuss this.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -Kei
>
> Matthias Samwald wrote:
>>
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> Of course, I will take every measure to coordinate what I am doing  
>> with the scientific discourse task, as well as the BioRDF and LODD  
>> tasks. I am trying to participate on all of the conference calls of  
>> these tasks, even though it can be a bit difficult sometimes. I  
>> think having an overly strong division between the different tasks  
>> did not work that well in the last charter of the HCLS IG (where we  
>> started out with several tasks, which mostly converged to a single  
>> task during the course of the two years). Therefore I try to follow  
>> all of the task forces (with the exception of COI in the recent  
>> months, but that might change).
>>
>> BioRDF seemed like a better choice for being an official umbrella  
>> for that work, since it involves the conversion of large amounts of  
>> biomedical datasets into RDF/OWL, does not involve discourse  
>> representation (but connects to it) and is not specifically focused  
>> on drug information. I will discuss and coordinate any part of the  
>> project that might be relevant for scientific discourse and drug  
>> information with the Scientific Discourse and LODD task force  
>> members in the respective conference calls.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Matthias Samwald
>>
>> DERI Galway, Ireland
>> http://deri.ie/
>>
>> Konrad Lorenz Institute for Evolution & Cognition Research, Austria
>> http://kli.ac.at/
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Tim Clark" <twclark@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 12:14 PM
>> To: "Matthias Samwald" <samwald@gmx.at>
>> Cc: "kei cheung" <kei.cheung@yale.edu>; <public-semweb- 
>> lifesci@w3.org>
>> Subject: Re: [BioRDF] BioSIOC / aTag task
>>
>>> Hi Matthias,
>>>
>>> My concern is not redundancy of content, or of technical   
>>> implementation, but of potential semantic redundancy and/or  
>>> mismatch  between two formulations of the same basic idea.
>>>
>>> This problem could arise precisely because the form in which the   
>>> content is expressed - i.e. scientific assertions - would have   
>>> different technical implementations, despite being semantically   
>>> identical at a fundamental level.   Therefore I think your  
>>> proposed  work should it be carefully coordinated with SWAN-SIOC  
>>> both before and  during development to ensure alignment - if it is  
>>> to be part of an  official HCLS task.
>>>
>>> When you initially proposed your idea on the Scientific Discourse   
>>> call, I felt confident this coordination could occur, if and when  
>>> the  work was started, because it was being done in the same task  
>>> group as  the other Discourse tasks.  Now that you have proposed  
>>> it again in  BioRDF,  I am not confident this coordination will  
>>> occur spontaneously  unless we make it happen - therefore I  
>>> suggest you and Kei and I spend  some time exploring the  
>>> ramifications of starting this task in another  group and how to  
>>> achieve alignment.  Perhaps Susie could lend a hand  in this  
>>> discussion as well.
>>>
>>> If it later turns out I am wrong and it turns out, after  
>>> discussion,  that there is no need for any pre-alignment or  
>>> coordination of your  work with the Discourse tasks, we will still  
>>> have had the chance to  understand your ideas better, and have  
>>> shared our thinking, which is  all good.
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>> On Jan 7, 2009, at 4:33 AM, Matthias Samwald wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear Tim,
>>>>
>>>> The project I have in mind is not redundant with SWAN-SIOC, both  
>>>> in  its technical implementation and the biomedical content that  
>>>> will be represented. The statements will not have discourse  
>>>> relationships  among themselves, and indeed such relationships  
>>>> would be better  represented through the vocabulary that SWAN can  
>>>> add to the basic  SIOC vocabulary.
>>>> This project could also demonstrate the value of the alignment  
>>>> of  SWAN and SIOC, showing that information represented in basic  
>>>> SIOC  can be easily aligned with information represented in the  
>>>> more  expressive SWAN vocabulary, via the SWAN-SIOC alignment.  
>>>> This is  important for demonstrating the advantages gained (in  
>>>> terms of  interoperability) by the SWAN-SIOC alignment.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Matthias Samwald
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Tim Clark
>>> Director of Informatics, MassGeneral Institute for  
>>> Neurodegenerative Disease
>>> Instructor in Neurology, Harvard Medical School
>>> 617-947-7098 (mobile)
>>
>>
>
>
>

Tim Clark
Director of Informatics, MassGeneral Institute for Neurodegenerative  
Disease
Instructor in Neurology, Harvard Medical School
617-947-7098 (mobile)
Received on Wednesday, 7 January 2009 18:58:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:00:54 GMT