RE: Unstructured vs. Structured (was: HL7 and patient records in RDF/OWL?)

> >The point I'm trying to make is this: The concept of 
> "structuredness" 
> >is relative and context-sensitive.

I don't think anyone will doubt the definition of "structured or not" is not
relative and context-sensitive. 

When I first raise my "confusion" (not "objection") over Davide's
"unstructured-to-structured" wording, my intension was to clarify what kind
of problems that the bioRDF group attempts to tackle More specifically, I
was refering it within the context of "GRDDL" because IMHO, I don't think
GRDDL is designed to help RDF-ize natural language; GRDDL is designed to
specifically target at the XML-based documents. Because the draft proposal
of the bioRDF only says: "Learn about GRDDL, SPARQL, OWL, etc.", I want to
clarify where they are heading.  

The first thing first about best practice is to use the right technology for
the right problem.  If we always use a screw driver to knock a nail, it
won't get any easier than using the hammer no matter how hard or good we
practice. On the other hand, we should also refrain ourselves being carried
away and think that all we need is a (few) technology. If we did so, we
would be falling in the trap of the old saying - if all you got is a hammer,
everyting looks like a nail.

Xiaoshu

Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2006 14:24:34 UTC