Hi Steve
What's the advantage in using a wikispecies URI over an NCBI Taxon ID?
Of course with the taxon ID we would need a conversion of the NCBI
taxonomy to OWL classes, which is fairly trivial, and there a number
of such conversions around (and ideally there would be some kind of
ontology lifecycle management involved, since species taxonomies are
not stable)
Also this doesn't seem to solve the problem that Alan wanted to refer
to a type that is more specific than Bivalvia, but more general than
any one taxonomic subclass.
I favour Alan's solution, which is for him to make his own Mussel
owl:class, either a stable class or an rdf bnode, and then to
associate with that class either necessary or preferably necessary
and sufficient conditions, using stable taxon IDs (and possibly other
resources) then let the reasoners take care of figuring out
equivalence or subsumption if queried via these taxon IDs.
On May 4, 2006, at 3:13 PM, Steve Chervitz wrote:
How about using a wikispecies URL, where the taxonomic term appears
in the
URL:
http://species.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bivalvia
For mussels you can't currently get much below the Order level, but
this is
just a matter of fleshing out the wikispecies database.
Steve
From: Alan Ruttenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 01:42:16 -0400
To: <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [BiONT][BioRDF] Mussels
Resent-From: <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 05:42:38 +0000
Another thought is to use wikipedia URL's as the identifier - there
are often matches at this level of description. The downside is that
you lose the superclass relations that you have in taxonomy, e.g. the
ability to query for mammal, and get back all the primates, mice,
rats, etc.
e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mussel
-Alan
On May 4, 2006, at 1:29 AM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
I am inclined to create a class which is the union of all these
classes and then annotate the antibody with that class.
