- From: <Eric.Neumann@aventis.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 14:33:27 -0400
- To: <gofriends@geneontology.org>, <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <81BE96441EAC744B8F6E1E738C53F958B4F096@sccsmxsusr05.pharma.aventis.com>
Hi, It's apparent that the role of RDF as part of the use of GO has been growing (based on email discussions), but I have not been able to find any clear description on it's intended or future uses from the GeneOntology web site. Since there are a bunch of different applications possible by properly utilizing an RDF framework, I wanted to find out if anyone would be willing to discuss/develop some broader use cases (around GO) based on RDF approaches. First, let me clarify that RDF is about specifying statements about facts, relations and other statements (including hypotheses) in an XML-formatted way--but it doesn't require DTDs or schemas to be specified anymore. RDF is also useful for helping specify web-services in a fine-grained way (e.g., S-MOBY), but RDF should not be limited to only this kind of application (ala tool stds, OMG etc.). An interest group has recently been formed at W3C to address such potential uses: Semantic Web for Life Science IG. This is NOT a standards group, nor will it define ontologies-- it's goal is to find timely approaches/solutions for the best use of Semantic Web (SW) technology, and will be a forum for discussion, demonstration, integration, and just good ole fashioned brainstorming! For example: Currently GO is used to annotate/classify genes and proteins, but why not also consider using it to link to 2 alternative splice variants to subsets of the gene's GO ids using Affx's semantic namespace (I'm using N3 notation here to since it is more legable than RDF but isomorphic with it) : Gene5 a affx:Gene ; affx:chr "chr1" ; affx:hasVariant [affx:representedBy :gi9887088; affx:process GO:0006306; affx:localized GO:0016021 ] ; affx:hasVariant [affx:representedBy :gi9887090; affx:process GO:0006218; affx:localizized GO:0005887]. Now that I can associate different GO process id's that were associated with the same gene to different splice variants, the semantics of variant function can be explored using "my:" ontology for relating process with location: Gene5_Context my:for Gene5 ; my:withTranscript :gi9887088 ; my:constrains {GO:0006306 my:occursIn GO:0016021 .} . I also can make claims or hypotheses about additional functions (represented here by the curly brackets, rdf:parseType="Quote"), which I can share without the need for it to be first curated: A9311 a Annotation ; dc:creator "Jonathan Smythe" ; affx:hypothesizes { Gene5 a affx:Gene ; affx:hasVariant [affx:representedBy :gi9887088; affx:process GO:0006306; affx:associatedWith omim:209920] . } . Note the quoted content within the curly bracket is structured exactly as the top level fact before, but since it is quoted, it is not "reified" until someone "accepts" the hypothesis using a rule (in RDF) to make it an explicit assertion. We have specified several use cases like this one (e.g, http://www.affymetrix.com/community/publications/affymetrix/tmsplice/index.af fx), and there are dozens more of use cases that can be easily considered and tried to extend descriptive use/power of GO based annotations. Of cource, once the document is in an RDF form, it is also accessible to reasoners and aggregators... Here is where I think the GO community would benefit immensely from such RDF applications. I'd be interested to hear what plans the GeneOntology group has for utilizing RDF towards GO's goals, and whether the SWLS-IG can help coordinate efforts through the W3C technologies and forums. best, Eric Eric Neumann, Ph.D. Global Head of Knowledge Management Aventis - DI&A Tel: 908-231-3510 Fax: 908-231-3307 Eric.Neumann@Aventis.com
Received on Wednesday, 14 April 2004 14:34:45 UTC