- From: Gary Berg-Cross <gbergcross@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 19:25:28 -0400
- To: paola.dimaio@gmail.com
- Cc: public-xg-eiif <public-xg-eiif@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <f867f9b20904261625y3e8e7b30g8ae70ab7869654f6@mail.gmail.com>
Paola An ontology needs some defined relations and so do any vocabulary defintions. The table below is the “ontology” of core relations for use by OBO<http://obo.sourceforge.net/>Foundry (ontologies http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#details). I can see using all but perhaps the “derives from” relation in our vocabulary and ontology work. The set they have handles 3 types of “part” relations and has several geospatial relations we need (e.g. located in, adjacent to) and handles sequences (preceded by) and a way of showing aggregate events/actions (has participant). We might at least standardize the way we use relations in glossary definitions and point back to these as the standard definition. *Summary Table* *name * *transitive * *symmetric * *reflexive * *anti-symmetric * *documentation * is_a + + + View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:is_a#OBO_REL:is_a> part_of + + + View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:part_of#OBO_REL:part_of> integral_part_of + + + View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:integral_part_of#OBO_REL:integral_part_of> proper_part_of + View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:proper_part_of#OBO_REL:proper_part_of> located_in + + View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:located_in#OBO_REL:located_in> contained_in View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:contained_in#OBO_REL:contained_in> adjacent_to View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:adjacent_to#OBO_REL:adjacent_to> transformation_of + View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:transformation_of#OBO_REL:transformation_of> derives_from + View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:derives_from#OBO_REL:derives_from> preceded_by + View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:preceded_by#OBO_REL:preceded_by> has_participant View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:has_participant#OBO_REL:has_participant> has_agent View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:has_agent#OBO_REL:has_agent> instance_of View detailed summary<http://www.obofoundry.org/ro/#OBO_REL:instance_of#OBO_REL:instance_of> Of course this doesn't straighten out the issues of what to present about ontology and voc in the final report, but it is at least a step on standardization for some semantics. Gary Berg-Cross,Ph.D. gbergcross@gmail.com http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?GaryBergCross SOCoP Executive Secretary Principal, EM&I Semantic Technology Potomac, MD 301-762-5441 On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 4:03 PM, <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote: > > (apol for array of emails, I am on discovery mode) > > > also another example of recent work > > http://webkr.cs.vu.nl/slides/WebKR_Lecture7_2.pdf > > -- > > --
Received on Sunday, 26 April 2009 23:26:07 UTC