- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:39:47 -0400
- To: Eric Miller <em@w3.org>
- Cc: 'public-semweb-lifesci' <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, olivier@nlm.nih.gov, Benjamin Good <goodb@interchange.ubc.ca>
With minor tweaks this can be used in OWL - Matthias Samwald has done this and used it in his BioPAX work. I am working on a proposal to formally include it in BioPAX, for an upcoming workshop we are having. That said, merely being syntactically OWL adds little semantic benefit. Semantics, in the OWL sense (and I think our sense) is added by including formal axioms on the classes and properties, something upon which inference (and consistency checking, a form of inference) can be based. -Alan On Jun 6, 2006, at 9:05 AM, Eric Miller wrote: > Often times when constructing thesauri, classification schemes, > taxonomies, etc. you don't necessarily (as Olivier states) want to > license the inferencing capabilities of OWL. A common way of exposing > and making explicit these thesauri relationships in terms of the > Semantic Web is exactly what SKOS is designed for. > > I think representing UMLS in terms of SKOS would be a very powerful > enabler for the HCLSIG community. > > --eric
Received on Tuesday, 6 June 2006 13:40:03 UTC