Toby Inkster wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010 18:06:08 -0500
Peter DeVries <[email protected]> wrote:
I would appreciate feedback on these models and any suggestions for
how they could be improved. :-)
The following:
@prefix txn: <http://lod.taxonconcept.org/ontology/txn.owl#> .
<http://lod.taxonconcept.org/ses/mCcSp#Species>
a owl:Class ;
txn:kingdom "Animalia" ;
txn:phylum "Arthropoda" ;
txn:class "Insecta" ;
txn:order "Lepidoptera" ;
txn:family "Nymphalidae" ;
txn:genus "Danaus" ;
txn:epithet "plexippus" ;
txn:author_year "(Linnaeus, 1758)" ;
txn:commonName "Monarch Butterfly" ;
foaf:page <foo> .
Appears to be an almost identical way of representing a species concept
to the one I came up with a couple of years ago:
@prefix txn: <http://purl.org/NET/biol/ns#> .
<http://lod.taxonconcept.org/ses/mCcSp#Species>
a txn:Taxonomy ;
# note: txn:Taxonomy rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Class.
txn:kingdom "Animalia" ;
txn:phylum "Arthropoda" ;
txn:class "Insecta" ;
txn:order "Lepidoptera" ;
txn:family "Nymphalidae" ;
txn:genus "Danaus" ;
txn:species "plexippus" ;
txn:authority "Linnaeus, 1758" ;
txn:commonName "Monarch Butterfly" ;
txn:seeAlso <foo> .
I wonder if you could reuse the URIs I minted rather than creating new
ones?
Peter,
+1
Re. reuse request from Toby. It early days, so little or no cost ;_
If we could stamp out any incompatibilities between the two ontologies,
then I'd be happy to point the http://purl.org/NET/biol/ns URI at your
ontology, so we'd just have a single merged ontology.
Great!
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
President & CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
