- From: Kashyap, Vipul <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG>
- Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 12:54:08 -0400
- To: "Marco Brandizi" <brandizi@ebi.ac.uk>, <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Cc: <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
> For instance:
>
> Set1 := { gene1, gene2, gene3 }
>
> is the set of genes that are expressed in experiment0
>
> (genei and exp0 are OWL individuals)
>
>
> I am understanding that this may be formalized in OWL by:
>
> - declaring Set1 as owl:subClassOf Gene
> - using oneOf to declare the membership of g1,2,3
> (or simpler: (g1 type Set1), (g2 type Set1), etc. )
> - using hasValue with expressed and exp0
[VK] Actually, I missed this in my first reply. Which of the assumptions are
true:
1. You are modeling a gene g1 as an instance of the "Gene class"
2. You are modeling a gene g1 as a subclass of the "Gene class"
Your options depend on which of these is true. In fact this is one of the design
choices that has come up in designing the Parkinson's disease ontology.
http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLS/OntologyTaskForce/DesignIssues
http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLS/OntologyTaskForce/SeedOntology
---Vipul
Received on Friday, 8 September 2006 16:54:29 UTC