W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > December 2014

RE: linking a symbol with a dataset

From: R. Cornet <r.cornet@amc.uva.nl>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 15:02:55 +0000
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Vladimir Mironov <vladimir.n.mironov@gmail.com>
CC: "snachimuthu@mmm.com" <snachimuthu@mmm.com>, Michel Dumontier <michel.dumontier@gmail.com>, w3c semweb hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8B203F34D625E744B3C74A2D798D5F201BE91C69@MS-APP-804D.amc.intra>
I would think Mick Jagger's tongue is definetely part of the Rolling Stones :).

But seriously...
When referring to being part of a dataset It feels to me like you're saying "Rolling Stones partOf Wikipedia:British_Rock_Lemma"
Or, alternatively: head structure partOf body; head structure partOf SNOMED CT.

This is mixing up instance properties and class properties.

Or am I missing something?

Thanks for allowing me to lurk on many great and instructive conversations!

Ronald




-----Original Message-----
From: Pat Hayes [mailto:phayes@ihmc.us]
Sent: donderdag 11 december 2014 08:32
To: Vladimir Mironov
Cc: snachimuthu@mmm.com; Michel Dumontier; w3c semweb hcls
Subject: Re: linking a symbol with a dataset


On Dec 11, 2014, at 12:11 AM, Vladimir Mironov <vladimir.n.mironov@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm not quite sure that any of the constituents of a triple is a member of the data set (the triple certainly is).

Neither the triples nor their components are *members* of the dataset. They might be in some sense 'part of' or 'included in' the dataset, but they are not members of the actual dataset, which is defined normatively to be a set of named RDF graphs.

> Let me give a parable. "Mick Jagger is part of the Rolling Stones. Mick's thumb is part of Mick Jagger." Is Mick's thumb part of the Rolling Stones?

Two different senses of "part", right? Unless one is a mereologist, of course, who would say that the answer was clearly yes.

Pat

>
> Cheers
>
> On 9 December 2014 at 23:36, <snachimuthu@mmm.com> wrote:
> We use "has member" to relate arbitrary groups and their members. Our implementation is for binary relationships in a relational database, and so this should work for RDF too.
>
> Senthil.
>
> <Mail Attachment.gif>
> Senthil K. Nachimuthu, MD, PhD | Medical Informaticist 3M Health
> Information Systems, Inc.
> 575 W Murray Blvd, Murray, UT 84123, USA
> Office: +1 801 265 4636
> snachimuthu@mmm.com | www.3mtcs.com
>
>
>
>
> From:        Vladimir Mironov <vladimir.n.mironov@gmail.com>
> To:        Michel Dumontier <michel.dumontier@gmail.com>
> Cc:        w3c semweb hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
> Date:        12/09/2014 03:20 PM
> Subject:        Re: linking a symbol with a dataset
>
>
>
> Hi Michel,
>
> as everybody knows, atomic means 'indivisible'. In the world of Nature, of course, there is nothing atomic.
> However, in the world of RDF subject, predicate, and object are atomic - there are no other concepts these three could be subdivided into.
> I haven't seen such a property so far in vocabularies, I proposed it because  you guys could not find anything suitable for the task.
> I feel it serves the purpose and nothing may prevent you from introducing a new property in want of appropriate ones. This one should be, of course, a subProperty of 'partOf'.
>
> Cheers
>
> On 9 December 2014 at 19:36, Michel Dumontier <michel.dumontier@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Vladimir,
>   Can  you elaborate with a definition for 'isAtomicPartOf'?  Is this
> already defined in a vocabulary?
>
> m.
> Michel Dumontier
> Associate Professor of Medicine (Biomedical Informatics), Stanford
> University Chair, W3C Semantic Web for Health Care and the Life
> Sciences Interest Group http://dumontierlab.com
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:33 AM, Vladimir Mironov
> <vladimir.n.mironov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > how about 'isAtomicPartOf'?
> >
> > Vladimir
> >
> > On 8 December 2014 at 18:04, Michel Dumontier
> > <michel.dumontier@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>   On the call today we discussed the issue [1] of linking a symbol
> >> in a triple (e.g. a subject, a predicate, *or* an object) to a dataset.
> >> The use case for this is twofold : to provide a direct link between
> >> data items and their datasets in a Linked Data manner, and to
> >> survey the use of data items across datasets. While we agreed that
> >> using a relation such as dc:isPartOf is fairly natural to link the
> >> triple itself to the dataset, it is much less clear for linking the
> >> components to the dataset. In Bio2RDF we used void:inDataset, but
> >> the domain of this relation is a foaf:Document, so it muddies the
> >> semantics by entailing a possible disjoint type with whatever the
> >> subject has been typed with (e.g. protein, disease, etc).
> >>
> >> We discussed the suitability of existing vocabularies, but none, to
> >> our knowledge, clearly fit the situation. For instance, can
> >> dc:isPartOf (http://purl.org/dc/terms/isPartOf) be used as a
> >> logical partition of the dataset with the data item? or is SIO's
> >> refers to
> >> (http://semanticscience.org/resource/refers-to) potential suitable,
> >> if not somewhat vague?
> >>
> >> We welcome your thoughts on the matter. Do you know of a suitable
> >> relation? Should we consider some new relation such as utilizes /
> >> is-utilized-in or is-data-item-in / has-data-item?
> >>
> >> Cheers!
> >>
> >> m.
> >>
> >> [1] https://github.com/joejimbo/HCLSDatasetDescriptions/issues/90
> >>
> >> Michel Dumontier
> >> Associate Professor of Medicine (Biomedical Informatics), Stanford
> >> University Chair, W3C Semantic Web for Health Care and the Life
> >> Sciences Interest Group http://dumontierlab.com
> >>
> >
>
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 home
40 South Alcaniz St.            (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile (preferred)
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes







________________________________

AMC Disclaimer : http://www.amc.nl/disclaimer

________________________________
Received on Thursday, 11 December 2014 15:03:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:21:45 UTC