W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > February 2010

Re: When does a document acquire (web) semantics?

From: Jim McCusker <mccusker@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 17:16:30 -0500
Message-ID: <68084f3e1002011416h4eae3dav31cc8da72d8ef3e2@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Madden <john.madden@duke.edu>
Cc: w3c semweb HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, Oliver Ruebenacker <curoli@gmail.com>
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 4:53 PM, John Madden <john.madden@duke.edu> wrote:

> Hi Oliver,
>        (For a medical document, it might not be *me* that insists on this
> claim; it might be my employer/hospital.
>        They don't want people attributing meanings to the document other
> than those they have had a chance
>        to approve, because they don't want somebody claiming the RDF/OWL
> they published led to a subsequent
>        adverse event (by, e.g. being used in a decision support system at
> some later time that attributed a different
>        meaning to some vocabulary item). So for example they might only
> allow locally defined classes properties
>        to be used in the graph.)
>

To me, this sounds a little ridiculous. Anyone can make an ontology that
"misinterprets" the data in the original document by adding superclasses and
superproperties. The employer/hospital cannot prohibit someone else's
ignorance.

Jim
--
Jim McCusker
Programmer Analyst
Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics
Yale School of Medicine
james.mccusker@yale.edu | (203) 785-6330
http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu

PhD Student
Tetherless World Constellation
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
mccusj@cs.rpi.edu
http://tw.rpi.edu
Received on Monday, 1 February 2010 22:17:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:00:58 GMT