- From: Nigam Shah <nigam@stanford.edu>
- Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:23:23 -0700
- To: "'Xiaoshu Wang'" <wangxiao@musc.edu>, "'Joanne Luciano'" <jluciano@genetics.med.harvard.edu>
- Cc: "'Mary Montoya'" <mhm@ncgr.org>, <semantic-web@w3.org>, <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
> I am not familiar with the OBO, from what I just read from the > OBO spec, I think OBO does have term like "intersection_of", > "union_of", "disjoint_from". From I can see now, the > translation should be syntactic for most, but not all, > concepts. For those concepts that there is any OWL equivalent, > for instance, is_cyclic, you probably need to invent some OWL > construct for yourself. Hi All, The latest updates on the OBO to OWL translation are at: http://www.bioontology.org/wiki/index.php/OboInOwl:Main_Page For those interested in details, there is a google spreadsheet which tells you exactly what maps to what (with a rationale) this is at: http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pWN_4sBrd9l1Umn1LN8WuQQ > But now goes back to Mary's question, I do think obo:Term is > for the same concept of "resource" in RDF. There is no need for the > obo:Term. Yes and there is no obo:Term in the mapping. > The OBO prefix should be turned into a namespace URI, then the > obo:id can be concatenated to form the URI for each specific > term. That's whats is done. > However, regarding how to assign the namespace URI, you > should consult the OBO administration about the policy because > dereferening any URI should lead to soemthing but not a 404. Well, techincally not all URI are URLs ... And a 404 only applies to URLs. > So, assigning the namespace URI also means the responsibility of > maintaining the document. We are hoping to do this with www.bioontology.org/ontologyname#termname, please see the mapping if you are interested in the details. Regards, Nigam.
Received on Thursday, 12 October 2006 17:26:13 UTC