RE: best practice relation for linking to image/machine-opaque docs? biomedical use case

2011-01-10 Thread Daniel Rubin
Hi, For example: http://stanford.edu/~rubin/pubs/Rubin-IEEEIntelSys-2009.pdf http://stanford.edu/~rubin/pubs/Channin-JDI-2009.pdf or others there on Annotation and Image Markup.. Daniel ___ Daniel L. Rubin, MD, MS Desc

Re: best practice relation for linking to image/machine-opaque docs? biomedical use case

2011-01-10 Thread Maryann Martone
We have also been working on semantic tagging of image parts, from the microscopy realm. We have been working in this area with our Web Image Browser. This system is designed for annotation of extrememly large images coming from light and electron microscopy. A demo can be seen at: htt

Re: best practice relation for linking to image/machine-opaque docs? biomedical use case

2011-01-10 Thread Paolo Ciccarese
Dear Daniel, I am very interested in revising the material you have related to image fragments identification. I just had a look of your website, could you help me in selecting the 2 or 3 papers that you consider most appropriate in this context? Thank you Paolo On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 3:49 PM,

RE: best practice relation for linking to image/machine-opaque docs? biomedical use case

2011-01-10 Thread Daniel Rubin
Interesting. In case you weren't aware, we've done quite a bit on semantic image annotation and creating and XML schema for specifying regions of images and the ontology terms to describe them.. I have a number of papers on this on my web site if you're interested.. Daniel ___

Re: best practice relation for linking to image/machine-opaque docs? biomedical use case

2011-01-10 Thread Tim Clark
Hi Michael, The default is assumed to be pixels. Thanks very much for the suggestion regarding GeIML. Subclasses of AO's Selector class have been worked through in some detail for annotating text, but have not received comparably detailed attention for images. This is something we are hopi

Re: best practice relation for linking to image/machine-opaque docs? biomedical use case

2011-01-10 Thread Paolo Ciccarese
Hi Micheal, On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Michael Miller wrote: > hi tim and scott, > > in looking at the ImageSelector, i'm surprised there are no units > specifically specified, either as a default or as a property. are they > assumed to be pixels? > In the currently defined InitEndCornerS

RE: best practice relation for linking to image/machine-opaque docs? biomedical use case

2011-01-10 Thread Michael Miller
hi tim and scott, in looking at the ImageSelector, i'm surprised there are no units specifically specified, either as a default or as a property. are they assumed to be pixels? also, you might want to take a look at GelML (http://psidev.info/index.php?q=node/448) for a bit more sophisticated way

Re: best practice relation for linking to image/machine-opaque docs? biomedical use case

2011-01-10 Thread Tim Clark
Hi Scott, For referring to a portion of an image, let me point you to work in my group done in collaboration with HCLS Scientific Discourse Task, UCSD, Elsevier, and one of the major pharmas. Paolo Ciccarese is the main author, and this work is based on the earlier W3C project Annotea. AO, An

RE: best practice relation for linking to image/machine-opaque docs? biomedical use case

2011-01-10 Thread Michel_Dumontier
> In Health Care and Life Science domains, image data is a common form > of data under discussion so a best practice for referring to an image > or to an (extractable) feature *within* an image would cover a > fundamental need in biomedicine to point to 'raw' data as evidence (as > well as giving

Re: best practice relation for linking to image/machine-opaque docs? biomedical use case

2011-01-10 Thread M. Scott Marshall
[Scott dusts off old use case and pulls from the shelf. Adjusts subject of thread. Was: best practice for referring to PDF] In Health Care and Life Science domains, image data is a common form of data under discussion so a best practice for referring to an image or to an (extractable) feature *wit

No BioRDF today: BioRDF telcon next week

2011-01-10 Thread M. Scott Marshall
There will be no BioRDF telcon this week. Next week on Monday Jan. 17, we will have Tim Clark (confirmed) and Sudeshna Das (pending) from Scientific Discourse join us to take another look at how we can connect our work in the area of experiment RDF. http://esw.w3.org/HCLSIG_BioRDF_Subgroup/Meeting

Suggestion - Add Uniprot data

2011-01-10 Thread Ajit G Warrier
Hi this is Ajit from Amrita university India. I had a view of DERI Health care and Life science database.Good to know that the knowledge base has 400 million RDF statements. Basically I am a bioinformatician and have to indulge with a bulk amount of data. currently I am focusing on Protein data