- From: Eric Jain <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 17:08:16 +0200
- To: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Carole Goble wrote: > Its ain't all Pharmas :-) Yes, but we like to pretend :-) I think it is important to realize that most of what you can do with semantic web technologies can be accomplished by brute force programming, too. The point that needs to be made is that once the data reaches a certain degree of complexity semantic web technologies make the job less painful. Anyway, my main concern is that some issues like resource identification and version control would perhaps be better dealt with in a general semantic web interest group. On the other hand if the idea is that this group will simply identify and forward specific shortcomings with the existing technologies and standards that's fine. I'm also a bit suspicious about the idea of creating "core" vocabularies. Wouldn't this better be left open until there are at least a few databases with obvious overlaps in their vocabularies? Gidelines and best practices, on the other hand, could turn out to be really useful for helping more databases adopt semantic web technologies. Looking forward to see a "how to make my database semantic in 5 min" document ;-)
Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2005 15:08:36 UTC