On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Oliver Ruebenacker wrote: > Hello Mark, All, > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Mark Wilkinson <markw@illuminae.com> wrote: >> I agree - the issue also came up at the BioHackathon last week... basically, >> as Tom Oinn phrased it, "if you're thinking of using owl:sameAs... don't!" > > Is that a suggestion to abolish owl:sameAs? > >> Another predicate is needed that is less "rigourous" - owl:kindOfLike :-) > > What do we gain from non-rigorous statements? I am assuming that > when UniProt says "same as", they really mean "same as". I wish we would ;-) but sometimes we make mistakes, and I think the case ben described is one of them. we could replace the owl:sameAs in our tissues set by rdfs:seeAlso or skos:related to map to PO and eVOC? opinions anyone? cheers, nicole PS: beware of the isolatedFrom property. it does not give you the tissue specificty of the protein. I intend to remove it, because I think it can be very misleading. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Nicole Redaschi Nicole.Redaschi@isb-sib.ch Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics Tel: +41 (0)22 379 59 65 CMU, rue Michel Servet 1 Fax: +41 (0)22 379 58 58 1211 Geneve 4, Switzerland www.isb-sib.ch - www.expasy.org - www.uniprot.org -------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 25 March 2009 21:55:09 UTC