Re: scientific publishing task force update

Forgot to say that I hope your kidney stone issues get resolved much 
sooner than these ontological issues. :-)

-Kei

John Rumble wrote:

> An unwritten rule about higher level ontologies is that they reflect 
> our knowledge today, not tomorrow. As knowledge evolves, the upper 
> level ontologies, especially, must also evolve. The example of the 
> concept "protein" is very apropos here. We can view it from  
> functional, structural, integrative angles, and I am sure there are a 
> bunch more. Then think about how our "concept" of a protein in each of 
> those views has evolved over the last 10 years, 20 years, 75 years. 
> The problem is evident.
>  
> At whatever level an ontology is developed, someone smarter or with 
> more insight or standing on the shoulder of giants will use that 
> onotlogy as a building block for a new and better higher level view of 
> nature. We have not reached the end of science yet.
>  
> In my days of leading similar standards developments, some of the best 
> progress we made was when we banned discussions of (1) higher-level 
> ontologies (though we called them something else back in those old 
> days) and (2) acronyms.
>  
> For those of you who have requested more references on my previous 
> e-mail about experiment description, it will have to wait a few more 
> days. Unfortunately bioinformatics have not solved my kidney stone 
> issues, which severely limit my ability to pull the requested 
> information together.
>  
> John
>  
> Dr. John Rumble
> Technical Director
> Information International Associates
> Oak Ridge TN
> www.infointl.com <http://www.infointl.com>
> jrumble@iiaweb.com <mailto:jrumble@iiaweb.com>
> jumbleusa@earthlink.net <mailto:jumbleusa@earthlink.net>
> 301 963 7903 (Home Office)
> 301 502 5729 (Cell)
> 865 298 1251 (Oak Ridge Office)

Received on Wednesday, 14 June 2006 02:34:51 UTC