- From: Eric Jain <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:52:53 +0200
- To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- CC: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>, Matthias Samwald <samwald@gmx.at>, public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > Who's mission? Remember that one of the reasons this came up was the > claim that the Uniprot URI identified the protein in the real world. Who claimed that? If we wanted to identify each protein in the real world we'd have to assign zillions of URIs just for the protein molecules in my body, impractical :-) What I'm trying to get at is that when we talk about a "protein", it's just a useful abstraction for us and our users, and it's the same for all other databases I'm aware of (except that their "proteins" may differ from ours). Since a "protein" is always a (more or less) artificial set of real things, I don't see the need for URIs for both the "record" and the "real thing"?
Received on Friday, 20 July 2007 07:55:23 UTC