- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 15:45:10 -0400
- To: jbarkley@nist.gov
- Cc: William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu, public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
I think that having more than one name for something is a necessary evil, but that it's undesirable to mint them unless we have a good reason to (and I can't think of one off the top of my head). -Alan On Mar 19, 2007, at 3:42 PM, jbarkley@nist.gov wrote: > > I reasoned as follows: > > If a part should be a class, then a different name for that part > should be an > equivalentClass. Likewise, if something were an individual, then > sameAs should > be used. > > I'll be happy to use whatever representation people think works > best for the > demo. > > jb > > > Quoting William Bug <William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu>: > >> Sorry I was unable to attend today's meeting. >> >> Alan reminds me of another question I had re: this BAMS OWL file, >> John. >> >> I understand why you'd not want to tuck the ID and abbreviation >> values into annotation properties. Is there a reason not to add them >> as DatatypeProperties? This would help to make the core subsumptive >> 'is_a' graph more meaningful but still keep these values accessible >> to both reasoners and to a SPARQL engine - correct? >> >> Cheers, >> Bill >> >> On Mar 19, 2007, at 10:15 AM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi John, >>> >>> Great progress! >>> >>> I think I would choose a single name and then have e.g, id and >>> abbreviation be properties of it. You can use annotation properties >>> for these. Then remove the "by" layer of the ontology - these lists >>> can be regenerate on demand via e.g. a sparql query. >>> >>> I notice that you use has_part and part_of in the definitions. >>> Remember that each is a all-some statement, so perhaps verify that >>> that is true. e.g. a has_part some b = every a has some b as a >>> part. a part_of some b = every a is part of some b. Sometimes only >>> one or the other direction is true. >>> >>> Speak to you soon, >>> >>> Best, >>> Alan >>> >>> >>> On Mar 19, 2007, at 8:18 AM, John Barkley wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> For another one of my action items, I put on the wiki demo page: >>>> http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLS/HCLSIG_DemoHomePage_HCLSIG_Demo >>>> a reference to the initial bams class style model and an updated >>>> bams instance >>>> style model. In both, I made the properties "has_source" and >>>> "has_target" >>>> transitive. Please let me know if this is not correct. >>>> >>>> There are no instances in the class style model. It is in the >>>> style of the >>>> Pizza tutorial >>>> (http://www.co-ode.org/resources/tutorials/ProtegeOWLTutorial.pdf). >>>> You may notice that the model is OWL Full, but that's only because >>>> there is an >>>> annotation property "has_bams_URL". Reasoners generally ignore >>>> annotation >>>> properties. >>>> >>>> jb >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> Bill Bug >> Senior Research Analyst/Ontological Engineer >> >> Laboratory for Bioimaging & Anatomical Informatics >> www.neuroterrain.org >> Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy >> Drexel University College of Medicine >> 2900 Queen Lane >> Philadelphia, PA 19129 >> 215 991 8430 (ph) >> 610 457 0443 (mobile) >> 215 843 9367 (fax) >> >> >> Please Note: I now have a new email - William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu >> >> >> >> >> > >
Received on Monday, 19 March 2007 19:46:00 UTC