Re: beyond 'formal' relations: describing relations between scientific and non-scientific material

Hi Dennis

Let me draw your attention to the SWAN ontology of scientific  
discourse, http://swan.mindinformatics.org/ontology.html for the  
latest release candidate version, and Ciccarese et al Journal of  
Biomedical Informatics 2008 Oct; 41(5):739-51. PMID: 18583197 for an  
extended discussion of the approach.   This ontology may well fit your  
needs.  Please feel free to contact us for additional information.

Best

Tim


Tim Clark
Director of Informatics, MassGeneral Institute for Neurodegenerative  
Disease
Instructor in Neurology, Harvard Medical School

> Resent-From: semantic-web@w3.org
> From: Dennis - UT <dv.eprints@gmail.com>
> Date: April 1, 2009 4:33:30 AM EDT
> To: semantic-web@w3.org
> Subject: beyond 'formal' relations: describing relations between  
> scientific and non-scientific material
>
>
> Hi,
>
> We are currently working on a repository for OAI ORE resource maps (http://www.openarchives.org/ore/1.0/toc 
> ). In this system we are trying to describe relations between  
> scientific publications and other material (both scientific and non- 
> scientific). To do this we are planning to use several (RDF)  
> vocabularies / ontologies.
>
> A question is: how to cope with diversity in scientific disciplines  
> and communication on the one hand and standardizing relation  
> descriptions when aggregating publications about a certain topic?  
> Vocabularies now available (FOAF, DCterms, etc) mainly restrict to  
> formal relations and do not include relations concerning the content  
> in a more detailed way than for instance 'dc:subject'. This may be  
> the consequence of the diversity in scientific semantics. Is there  
> any literature/article about this issue?
>
> An example case is describing relations between scientific  
> publications and their 'application'. For example: a publication  
> proposes certain changes, government policy makers later decide to  
> create actual policies based on this information. So far we didn’t  
> find any existing solution to describe such relations. Suggestions  
> on existing vocabularies to describe / annotate such relations are  
> very welcome, thanks!
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Dennis
> University of Twente
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 1 April 2009 14:19:33 UTC