- From: Tim Clark <twclark@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
- Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 15:13:15 -0400
- To: "Nigam Shah" <nigam@stanford.edu>
- Cc: <samwald@gmx.at>, "'Pat Hayes'" <phayes@ihmc.us>, <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>, <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>
We spent a lot of time in SWAN working through this issue. We would be happy to give a talk on it at an upcoming HCLS, preferably when Paolo returns from Italy. Tim On WednesdayMay 16, 2007, at 1:47 PM, Nigam Shah wrote: > > Interesting thread. From the user perspective we still need a way to > create these kinds of annotations (either on the statements/triples or > on the model/graph). Rolling one's own reification mechanism or using > named graphs (which don’t have support in RDF) is a technical decision > point, but what about the question of "how do we get users to provide > either of them?" > > -Nigam. > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org [mailto:public-semweb- >> lifesci-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of samwald@gmx.at >> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 9:40 AM >> To: Pat Hayes; phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk >> Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org; Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch >> Subject: Re: Advancing translational research with the Semantic Web >> >> >> >> >>> I really would suggest the named graphs would be a better >>> underpinning. Unlike reification, they do have a full semantics and > a >>> clear deployment model, and they follow in a long tradition of > naming >>> document-like semantic entities. And unlike RDF reification, they > are >>> not widely loathed, and they are fairly widely supported. >> >> Well, they are not supported by RDF/XML, which (unfortunately) is the >> main serialization format of RDF. Named graphs ARE supported by most >> triplestores, but they are mostly already reserved for other uses, > like >> the representation of provenance based on the RDF files that the > triples >> were loaded from. I think we are also lacking a standard vocabulary > for >> graph - subgraph relations, which would be needed if we want to >> represent graphs within graphs. >> >> -- Matthias >> >> >> >> >> . >> -- >> Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? >> Der kanns mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2007 19:13:42 UTC