- From: John Madden <john.madden@duke.edu>
- Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 09:42:11 -0500
- To: Eric Miller <em@w3.org>
- Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Eric, Thanks for this very informative response. I had not really appreciated until just now that GRDDL was intended to be applicable to arbitrary XML instance data as well, and this opens tremendous opportunities (but also suggests a need to really beat the drum among document standards groups !!!) I wonder whether this general item (RDF embedding technologies) deserves an explicit place in one of the workgroups. I don't think the best home is Ontologies workgroup. Maybe the Process/Choreography workgroup?? John On Feb 10, 2006, at 9:15 AM, Eric Miller wrote: > > > On Feb 10, 2006, at 3:41 AM, John Madden wrote: > >> >> Daniel, >> >> I spoke with Mark Musen about this project at the F2F, and we >> (SNOMED) would be eager to work collaboratively with NCBO on this >> as a demo. I'm coming out to the Protege short course next month >> (funded by SNOMED) and I'll have some material for you by then. >> >> (a) I think is to a large extent a "just-do-it" question, and we >> definitely want to "do it". The interesting part to me is the >> follow-up project of showing how OWL fragments built separately in >> this way can be related to a more global ontology that may not be >> quite so rigorously formal; that's (b). >> >> For me, in many ways the hardest part is (c), a standard way of >> encapsulating RDF-family markup in xml-schema dependent document >> formats. (I know this takes us afield from "ontologies" per se. >> Personally, I'd like to see GRDDL applied to these formats, but, >> we've got to be realistic that clinical medical documents today >> are almost never natively html, and GRDDL is/was rather html- >> focused. Also, you might argue that these formats do not assume >> web connectivity so it is insufficient to merely point to an >> extraction transform somewhere out on the web, when that might not >> be accessible; I'm not sure whether that really matters.) > > To be clear, GRRDL is not specific to XHTML and can be used for > translating XML instance data as well. One can use GRDDL for > "schema annotation" and transform all of the instance data that > conforms to a particular schema into RDF. I think the following > provides some of the relevant bits that explain this > > - http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/grddl/#ns-bind > > The current GRDDL documents don't elaborate on this 'schema > annotation' use case in as much detail as I think it deserves but I > expect this issue will be addressed in future work. An exploration > of this 'schema annotation' approach using GRDDL in a different > context is here > > - http://www.w3.org/2003/g/cc/demo > > hmm... not sure this is enough to go on in and of itself :( but it > may be useful. > >> I've spoken with the OpenDocument group about an RDF embedding >> standard and they're thinking about it but haven't come to any >> firm proposal. I also asked Norm Walsh about it a few months ago >> and he had it on his issue list for DocBook, but again I'm not yet >> aware of a definitive solution. For HL7-CDA, things are hazy right >> now. >> >> Daniel, I'd be interested in talking over details with you when >> I'm out in Stanford. > > The real challenge is modeling the semantics of HL7 and creating > the appropriate transformations. Please report back any discussions > to this list as I (along with many others it seems :) am interested > in this area. > > -- > eric miller http://www.w3.org/people/em/ > semantic web activity lead http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/ > w3c world wide web consortium http://www.w3.org/ > > >
Received on Friday, 10 February 2006 14:42:17 UTC