Alan, the life science community has for years applied an implicit transitivity to records of things, so that when many say: "http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/P12345 is expressed only in species homo sapien" they usually imply that "the protein referenced by datarecord:http:// purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/P12345 is expressed only in species homo sapien" I am not arguing for or against this "short-cut", but it is what it is, and certainly can be handled adding certain logic rules to dealing with datarecords and their content. Consider that it may be impossible to change the non-software part of the LS community on how they think about records vs. conceptual entities that exist in the real-world (non-IR). Eric On Jul 16, 2007, at 12:45 AM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > > On Jul 15, 2007, at 1:53 PM, Eric Jain wrote: > >>> Yes, but what sorts of statements can be made using http:// >>> purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/P12345 as the subject? Because it can >>> mean any of the below, even the protein class itself, how can a >>> *semantic web* statement be made using it? >> >> http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/P12345 is meant to be used for >> anything that isn't tied to a specific representation, hoped that >> would be clear? > > There are proteins, and there are records about proteins. Records > come in different formats. If I make a statement using this url, is > is about the record? or the protein? How should the agent come to > know? > > -Alan > > > Eric Neumann, PhD Senior Strategist, Teranode Corporation W3C co-chair Healthcare and Life Sciences Interest Group MIT Fellow, Science Commons +1 781 856 9132
Received on Monday, 16 July 2007 13:37:55 UTC