W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-eiif@w3.org > April 2009

Standard ontological relations for our voc -leverating Obo relations

From: Gary Berg-Cross <gbergcross@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 19:25:28 -0400
Message-ID: <f867f9b20904261625y3e8e7b30g8ae70ab7869654f6@mail.gmail.com>
To: paola.dimaio@gmail.com
Cc: public-xg-eiif <public-xg-eiif@w3.org>
Paola



An ontology needs some defined relations and so do any vocabulary
defintions.

The table below is the “ontology” of core relations for use by
OBO<http://obo.sourceforge.net/>Foundry (ontologies
http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#details).  I can see using all but perhaps the
“derives from” relation in our vocabulary and ontology work.

The set they have handles 3 types of “part” relations and has several
geospatial relations we need (e.g. located in, adjacent to) and handles
sequences (preceded by) and a way of showing aggregate events/actions (has
participant).  We might at least standardize the way we use relations in
glossary definitions and point back to these as the standard definition.



*Summary Table*

*name *

*transitive *

*symmetric *

*reflexive *

*anti-symmetric *

*documentation *

is_a

+



+

+

View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:is_a#OBO_REL:is_a>

part_of

+



+

+

View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:part_of#OBO_REL:part_of>

integral_part_of

+



+

+

View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:integral_part_of#OBO_REL:integral_part_of>

proper_part_of

+







View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:proper_part_of#OBO_REL:proper_part_of>

located_in

+



+



View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:located_in#OBO_REL:located_in>

contained_in









View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:contained_in#OBO_REL:contained_in>

adjacent_to









View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:adjacent_to#OBO_REL:adjacent_to>

transformation_of

+







View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:transformation_of#OBO_REL:transformation_of>

derives_from

+







View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:derives_from#OBO_REL:derives_from>

preceded_by

+







View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:preceded_by#OBO_REL:preceded_by>

has_participant









View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:has_participant#OBO_REL:has_participant>

has_agent









View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:has_agent#OBO_REL:has_agent>

instance_of









View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:instance_of#OBO_REL:instance_of>

Of course this doesn't straighten out the issues of what to present about
ontology and voc in the final report, but it is at least a step on
standardization for some semantics.

Gary Berg-Cross,Ph.D.
gbergcross@gmail.com
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?GaryBergCross
SOCoP Executive Secretary
Principal, EM&I Semantic Technology
Potomac, MD
301-762-5441



On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 4:03 PM, <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> (apol for array of emails, I am on discovery mode)
>
>
> also another example of recent work
>
> http://webkr.cs.vu.nl/slides/WebKR_Lecture7_2.pdf
>
> --
>
>


--
Received on Sunday, 26 April 2009 23:26:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 26 April 2009 23:26:08 GMT