- From: Oliver Ruebenacker <curoli@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 11:23:39 -0400
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Cc: W3C HCLSIG hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Hello Bijan, All, On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 7:40 AM, Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote: > On 29 Mar 2009, at 16:48, Oliver Ruebenacker wrote: > My first advice would be to develop a clear set of requirements, That is probably the most used phrase in the Semantic Web community. We should invent a catchy acronym for it. Maybe DACSOR? > perhaps in > terms of the ASK/TELL paradigm, for the role of the ontology in typical > Systems Biology applications you are trying to support. I have no idea what that paradigm is. > Classic applications of (description logic based) ontologies include > terminology development (e.g., see the caImages site), form management (see > Galen), and data integration and navigation (see Tambis). > > If your applications resemble these (or other standard applications) then > it's easy to give a wealth of advice, methodologically and technically. If > your application is radically different, then more work has to be done to > understand the application requirements. An ontology should be independent of a particular application. But if you are interested in what type of application I am working on check http://vcell.org/biopax Take care Oliver -- Oliver Ruebenacker, Computational Cell Biologist BioPAX Integration at Virtual Cell (http://vcell.org/biopax) Center for Cell Analysis and Modeling http://www.oliver.curiousworld.org
Received on Monday, 30 March 2009 15:24:22 UTC