Re: Fwd: HCLS IG Note on mapping and publishing life sciences RDF

Speaking of Publishing, over the weekend, I noticed that the Country Codes and subdivision codes (US&Canada) in "Citing Medicine"[1] are a bit out of date.  I can supply you with an ISO 3166 concordance, but you'll also want to address the issue of "terminology" languages[3] and "bibliographic" languages[4] too.  RFC5646[2] applies only to "terminology" or Communication (the language of websites).  Bibliographic language codes are codes for data collection, where relevant, e.g. Public Health or the Social Sciences and to segregate for redaction the non-relevant (interlingua) crud which collects (The paper entitled "Bibliographic Pack Rats in Kansas" was presented to the Brussels audience by an Irish-Armenian in Chinese.).

--Gannon


[1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK7256/
[2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5646
[3] http://www.rustprivacy.org/2012/urn/lang/display/

[4] http://www.rustprivacy.org/2012/urn/lang/person/



________________________________
 From: M. Scott Marshall <mscottmarshall@gmail.com>
To: HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>; biohackathon@googlegroups.com; linkedlifedatapracticesnote@googlegroups.com; public-lod@w3.org 
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 3:16 PM
Subject: Fwd: HCLS IG Note on mapping and publishing life sciences RDF
 
Here is another request for comments before we move the HCLS IG
Interest Group note below into html (still fluid but more viscous). I
am requesting comments from the LOD mailing list now as well, where
there have been several related discussions.

In the draft document below, we attempt to supply a guide for those
who would like to produce and publish data in RDF based on the
experiences of several of the LODD members. We would like you to lend
us your extensive expertise and would very much appreciate and
carefully consider your candid comments, questions or suggestions to
improve the note. Keep in mind that it is not 'all encompassing' but
meant to provide a good starting point.

IG Note (Draft) HCLS IG Note on mapping and publishing life sciences RDF
[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XzdsjCfPylcyOoNtDfAgz15HwRdCD-0e0ixh21_U0y0/edit?hl=en_US

The note above is based on a number of use cases described in an
article accepted to the Journal of Web Semantics. With the publisher's
permission, we have created a more 'W3C Note'-like version of the same
material and edited sections based on a wide range of comments. The
original use cases have been removed. If you are interested, I will
send you a pre-print.

We have attempted to frame the discussion in terms of applications
that make use of SPARQL queries (minimally), but also with (OWL)
reasoning and resolvable URIs - three separate yet interdependent sets
of concerns that seem to strongly influence opinions about appropriate
design in the community.

Note that we also suggest that metadata be made available in
statements about the graph URI *in the graph itself*, in addition to a
location specified in SPARQL-SD, and in the RDF returned by the graph
URI.

Cheers,
Scott

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: M. Scott Marshall <mscottmarshall@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 4:13 PM
Subject: HCLS IG Note on mapping and publishing life sciences RDF
To: HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>,
linkedlifedatapracticesnote@googlegroups.com,
biohackathon@googlegroups.com


Dear Colleagues,

With data sharing becoming more widely known and accepted, the need
for the means to accomplish data sharing *in practice* is an important
technical challenge. The Linked Open Drug Data task force in HCLS has
attempted to address this need by developing a DRAFT IG Note regarding
practices for mapping and linking life science data using RDF.  The
document, largely based on a recently submitted article, is being
staged as a Google Doc for your review and comment[1].

In the draft document above, we attempt to supply a guide for those
who would like to produce and publish data in RDF. We would like you
to lend us your extensive expertise and would very much appreciate and
carefully consider your candid comments, questions or suggestions to
improve the note.

Ideally, someone with basic knowledge of the Semantic Web stack and
the desire to 'publish' linked data will be able to get started from
this online document. We have removed the use case descriptions to
make it more 'W3C note-like' (concise). The use case descriptions will
be available in an article (in review) that covers much of the same
material (pre-prints available on request).

Kind regards,

M. Scott Marshall
LODD Chair,  on behalf of the LODD Editors and Contributors

IG Note (Draft)
[1]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XzdsjCfPylcyOoNtDfAgz15HwRdCD-0e0ixh21_U0y0/edit?hl=en_US

P.S. Lee Harland just alerted me to a relevant resource that we will
probably cite or otherwise integrate into the above note:
Looks very interesting:
Interactively Mapping Data Sources into the Semantic Web (presented at ISWC)
http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-783/paper2.pdf