W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > April 2008

Two documents for review by the Semantic Web in Health Care and Life Sciences Interest Group

From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 23:33:24 -0400
To: semantic-web@w3.org
Message-ID: <20080423033323.GA14999@w3.org>
Hi all, on behalf of the HCLS IG, I'd like to guilt or entice y'all to
read a couple of working drafts:

The first is a docuemnt that describes the construction of the
semantic web knowledge base used in the Demo at WWW2007 in Banff.
The HCLS Knowledgebase (HCLS-KB) is a biomedical knowledge base that
integrates 15 distinct data sources using currently available Semantic
Web Technologies such as the W3C standard Web Ontology Language (OWL)
and Resource Description Framework (RDF). This report outlines which
resources were integrated, how the KB was constructed using freely
available triple store technology, how it can be queried using the W3C
Recommended RDF query language SPARQL, and what resources and
inferences are involved in answering complex queries. While the
utility of the KB is illustrated by identifying a set of genes
involved in Alzheimer's Disease, the approach described here can be
applied to any use case that integrates data from multiple domains.

The second describes how another party added more stuff to this
web 'o data:
One of the challenges facing Semantic Web for Health Care and Life
Sciences is that of converting relational databases into Semantic Web
format. The issues and the steps involved in such a conversion have
not been well documented. To this end, we have created this document
to describe the process of converting SenseLab databases into
OWL. SenseLab is a collection of relational (Oracle) databases for
neuroscientific research. The conversion of these databases into
RDF/OWL format is an important step towards realizing the benefits of
Semantic Web in integrative neuroscience research. This document
describes how we represented some of the SenseLab databases in
Resource Description Framework (RDF) and Web Ontology Language (OWL),
and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of these
representations. Our OWL representation is based on the reuse of
existing standard OWL ontologies developed in the biomedical ontology
communities. The purpose of this document is to share our
implementation experience with the community.

We'd like your feedback on both documents. As an editor of the first,
I ask your advice in how to state simply the relatively complex OWL
assertions and the queries that run over them. tx.


office: +1.617.258.5741 32-G528, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02144 USA
mobile: +1.617.599.3509

Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than
email address distribution.

Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 03:34:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:04 UTC