- From: Xiaoshu Wang <wangxiao@musc.edu>
- Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 11:31:50 -0400
- To: <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
> > IMHO, inadequate separation of ontology's domain will have some
> > serious side effects in the long run. Aside from wasted
> bandwidth and
> > computation to handle the unnecessary statement, but when more
> > ontologies are shared, the chance for incur conflict will
> increase and
> > makes the sharing ontology impossible.
>
> In my opinion, we should stop to care too much about single,
> delimited ontologies. When I want to reuse some parts of FOAF
> while leaving out the ridiculous parts ('geekcodes',
> 'dna-checksums' and other jokes), I would simply extract the
> classes and properties that I need and add them to my
> ontology / software. As I see it, all of these statements
> should be seen as a global graph of RDF nodes and arcs. How
> these are represented locally inside .rdf /.owl files or
> through SPARQL endpoints is secondary.
I wish it could be that simple when you handle the task to machine. Show me
how you can only import the foaf:Person without fetching the foaf:geekcodes
as well? From other perspective, can you do something like, I only use this
part of GO but not the other part? Even if you are allowed to do so, what do
we mean sharing an ontology. If someone agress only ome portion, but others
agrees to other portion, of the ontology?
Are they sharing or not? Then the whole idea of ontology becomes useless,
right?
Xiaoshu
Received on Saturday, 16 September 2006 15:32:02 UTC