- From: Susanna Sansone <sansone@ebi.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:16:53 +0000
- To: Kei Cheung <kei.cheung@yale.edu>, kei.cheung@yale.edu
- CC: mdmiller <mdmiller53@comcast.net>, Jim McCusker <james.mccusker@yale.edu>, w3c semweb HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, Philippe Rocca-Serra <rocca@ebi.ac.uk>
Hi Kei, > isa-tab (how does this differ from mage-tab?) ISA-Tab is a superset of MAGE-Tab and serves to report multi-omics (and in general, multi-assays) studies. Please, see: http://isatab.sf.net and details in the ISA-Tab specification. Regards, Susanna -- Susanna-Assunta Sansone, PhD Project Coordinator http://isatab.sf.net http://biosharing.org http://www.ebi.ac.uk/net-project Kei Cheung wrote: > Hi Jim, Michael, > > The following paper describes how to convert mage-tab and isa-tab (how > does this differ from mage-tab?) into DAG for visualization purposes. > > http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2105/10/133 > > Why not DAG for machine readability as well? > > Cheers, > > -Kei > > mdmiller wrote: > >> hi jim, >> >> looks like you're making great progress. i have a few comments >> in-line below. >> >> cheers, >> michael >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim McCusker" >> <james.mccusker@yale.edu> >> To: "w3c semweb HCLS" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 6:05 AM >> Subject: magetab2magerdf >> >> >>> I'm distinguishing between magetab2rdf (raw conversion of magetab into >>> an RDF structure) and magetab2magerdf (conversion of magetab into an >>> RDF-based MAGE-OM structure) here. My purposes and goals require a >>> magetab2magerdf approach, so that's what I've been working on. >>> >>> I have checked in code for magetab2magerdf at the googlecode project >>> http://magetab2rdf.googlecode.com. The code can be checked out from: >>> >>> http://magetab2rdf.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/magetab2magerdf/ >>> >>> and example RDF is in: >>> >>> http://magetab2rdf.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/magetab2magerdf/examples/E-MEXP-986/ >>> >>> >>> I currently load the IDF-related entities into the RDF. I'm beginning >>> work on SDRF next. >>> >>> http://magetab2rdf.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/ontologies/mage-om.owl >>> contains the additional properties and classes needed to support an >>> RDF-based MAGE-OM on top of the MGED Ontology. >>> >>> A few notes on E-MEXP-986: >>> >>> The URI for the MGED Ontology is >>> http://mged.sourceforge.net/ontologies/MGEDontology.owl, but has been >>> set to http://mged.sourceforge.net/ontologies/MGEDontology.php in the >>> IDF. The actual Term Source name is "The MGED Ontology". >>> A common practice seems to be to refer to "MGED Ontology" without >>> reference to its URI. >> >> >> as you probably noticed, >> http://mged.sourceforge.net/ontologies/MGEDontology.php allows >> appending "#{class name}" to go directly to the definition of the >> term, so in a sense it is indeed a valid URI, that is a URL. it also >> came before the owl format. can th epowl format be reached into over >> he net to extract simply the class definition or does it need to be >> downloaded and processed locally? my understanding is that a site >> would have to have some sort of query, hopefully sparql, mechanism on >> top to enable this. >> >>> >>> Since I have to import the MGED ontology already for it's classes and >>> properties, I have already imported it under the correct URI. I have >>> added a kludge where if the term source name contains the string "MGED >>> Ontology", the code assumes you mean the MGED Ontology, and sets the >>> URI appropriately. However, this is a one-off solution. >> >> >> think of it as same as >> >>> >>> I went back and forth about importing the Term Source ontologies. >>> However, this particular experiment has used the "ArrayExpress" term >>> source using the URI "http://www.ebi.ac.uk/arrayexpress/" which >>> doesn't correspond to an available ontology, but is technically a term >>> source. >> >> >> yes, and it does support a query mechinism, albeit a one off for that >> site. i believe they plan on adding support for a sparql endpoint but >> aren't sure if or when. >> >>> >>> I'm considering attempting to import the ontology if it's available >>> and validate if it is, but if it fails to resolve to a document the >>> validation will not happen against that term source. >>> >>> A note on Limpopo: >>> >>> The IDF Comment didn't seem to import on this experiment. I'm not sure >>> if it's a format problem or something else. >> >> >> i ran into this also, the implementation assumes >> "Comment[type]\ttext\ttext..." to coresspond to the format of the >> other fields in the IDF. the MAGE-TAB 1.0 spec doesn't address, my >> assumption was that it was simply "Comment[type]text" but that's not >> what the parser expects. we'll be discussing this for the MAGE-TAB >> 1.1 spec to clarify it one way or another, possibly updating the >> parser before that. >> >>> >>> Thoughts and feedback are greatly appreciated. >>> >>> Jim >>> -- >>> Jim McCusker >>> Programmer Analyst >>> Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics >>> Yale School of Medicine >>> james.mccusker@yale.edu | (203) 785-6330 >>> http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu >>> >>> PhD Student >>> Tetherless World Constellation >>> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute >>> mccusj@cs.rpi.edu >>> http://tw.rpi.edu >>> >>> >> >> >> > --
Received on Monday, 14 December 2009 10:17:31 UTC