W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > June 2011

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

From: Adrian Walker <adriandwalker@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 07:19:49 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTinF=F=yJbYKQ70eY-kXDbCmP-r8iw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark <markw@illuminae.com>, Andrea Splendiani <andrea.splendiani@bbsrc.ac.uk>, Michel_Dumontier <Michel_Dumontier@carleton.ca>, "cc \"Sivaram Arabandi, MD\"" <sivaram.arabandi@gmail.com>, "M. Scott Marshall" <mscottmarshall@gmail.com>, Chime Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>, "andrea splendiani (RRes-Roth)" <andrea.splendiani@rothamsted.ac.uk>, "MMVagnoni@mdanderson.org" <MMVagnoni@mdanderson.org>, James Malone <malone@ebi.ac.uk>, HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Hi All,

Sorry to come in so late to this discussion but....

It would seem that the meaning that resides in the application (or in a
SPARQL query) should be part of the discussion.  Even if the data
identifiers have really fine readable meanings, an application can change
the semantics completely.  And, unless there are explanations of what the
app has done, no-one will be any the wiser unless the error is egregious (eg
-- the Eiffel tower is a dog).

Slides 51-52 of [1] are an attempt to diagram a way of dealing with app
semantics and data semantics together.

                             -- Adrian


Internet Business Logic
A Wiki and SOA Endpoint for Executable Open Vocabulary English Q/A over SQL
and RDF
Online at www.reengineeringllc.com
Shared use is free, and there are no advertisements

Adrian Walker

On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:23 PM, Mark <markw@illuminae.com> wrote:

>  If you want to work with a more sophisticated API - I might suggest the
>> OWL API. It's more powerful, but also more sophisticated
> +++++++++1!!
> Mark
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2011 11:20:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:52:47 UTC