i will be away from network for the week up april 6-10.
(surprise!)
i may be able to connect some in the mornings, but i can't promise.
i will probably have cell coverage.
--
-eric
office: +1.617.258.5741 32-G528, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02144 USA
mobile: +1.617.599.3509
(e...@w3.org)
Feel free to f
Hi Tim,
Unfortunately, I have a meeting conflict. I'll miss the call tomorrow.
One big thought is how to make the HCLS task forces "tranlational" to
each other (biological-clinical-pharmocological-patient).
Cheers,
-Kei
Tim Clark wrote:
Dear Colleagues:
This is a reminder for the HCLS Sc
Hi all,
I have made a few fixes and changes to the initial 0.3 release, and
although I didn't announce 0.3.1 as I found some necessary
improvements after releasing it, the 0.3.2 version has now been
released [1]. A set of blog posts on the Bio2RDF blog [2] attempt to
highlight some of the new feat
Dear Colleagues:
This is a reminder for the HCLS Scientific Discourse Task concall for
Apr 3 11am-noon Boston time (GMT-5).
Our basic agenda for tomorrow is to plan the objectives for our
breakout session at the upcoming HCLS F2F meeting, which is April 30 -
May 1 in Cambridge at MIT.
W
Apologies for multiple postings. Please forward to interested colleagues
and mailing lists.
--
The 11th International Protege Conference
June 23-26, 2009
University of
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Michel_Dumontier
wrote:
>> Actually, I'd say OWL is to blame here... that is, the OWL class was
>> not properly defined.
>
> Just to clarify - it's not OWL that's the problem. It's the
> representation of Chemistry in a formal logic-based language where it
> actuall
Minutes from the HCLS telcon are now available.
http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLSIG/Meetings/2009-04-02_Conference_Call
Thanks to EricP for scribing.
Susie
The minutes from the Pharma Ontology telcon are now available.
http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLSIG/PharmaOntology/Meetings/2009-04-02_Conference_Call
Thanks to Colin for scribing.
Cheers,
Susie
> -Original Message-
> From: public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-semweb-
> lifesci-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Egon Willighagen
> Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 10:57 AM
> To: Matthias Samwald
> Cc: Phillip Lord; Oliver Ruebenacker; Pat Hayes; public-semweb-lifesci
> Subj
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Matthias Samwald wrote:
>>> Reaction equations describe stochastic processes, that's why you can
>>> have non-integer molecule numbers
>>
>> I think you can't have non-integer molecule numbers because it makes
>> no chemical sense. Half a molecule is a whole molecu
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Oliver Ruebenacker wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Wacek Kusnierczyk
> wrote:
>> i'd agree that having non-integer *molecule numbers* sounds nonsense,
>> but having non-integer *relative molecule numbers* certainly doesn't.
>> in any case, the equation
>
Hi Scott (and others),
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 12:42 AM, M. Scott Marshall
wrote:
> Here's the reminder for Thursday's HCLS call.
I will not be able to make it today.
And I think I found which telcon's are most interesting to me (LODD
and BioRDF), though several others have my interest too. Last
On Apr 2, 2009, at 2:47 AM, Wacek Kusnierczyk wrote:
Pat Hayes wrote:
On Mar 31, 2009, at 7:49 AM, Oliver Ruebenacker wrote:
What about this statement:
"Two grams of hydrogen react with 16 grams of oxygen to 18 grams of
water"
If I were trying to do a professional job of 'ontologizing' t
Pat Hayes wrote:
>
> On Mar 31, 2009, at 7:49 AM, Oliver Ruebenacker wrote:
>
>> What about this statement:
>>
>> "Two grams of hydrogen react with 16 grams of oxygen to 18 grams of
>> water"
>
> If I were trying to do a professional job of 'ontologizing' this, it
> would be a formal rendering of
14 matches
Mail list logo
