sm specific), http://purl.org/molecule/type/organism/key . Has this
type of usage been envisioned? Does it seem reasonable?
Steve
[1] http://neurocommons.org/page/Common_Naming_Project
> On Aug 12, 2008, at 5:08 PM, Steve Chervitz wrote:
>
>>
>> On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:15:11
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:15:11 -0500, Bryan Bishop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 10 July 2008, Dan Brickley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> From a quick skim I don't see mention of W3C, RDF, Semantic Web etc
>> --- I was wondering if anyone here was involved and had contacts,
>> since th
I recently came across a web service that attempts to solve a similar
problem: associating one or more email addresses with the person who owns
the email addresses, represented by an avatar:
http://site.gravatar.com/
Gravatar enabled sites like Google's gmail will automatically pick up the
avata
Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 12 Jun 2006:
>
>> "MM" == Mark Musen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> MM> A colleague just pointed me to this (rather vacuous) article.
> MM> Does anyone know more about this work?
> MM> http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/dn9288-translator
Hi Mark:
> I'm writing a manuscript at the moment where I discuss LSIDs, and I'm
> trying to get a sense of how many people are using them "in the wild".
> I know that biopathways has set up a lot of "proxy" LSID resolvers, but
> that's kinda cheating :-) I'm wondering who is actually using th
It would be
nice if they provided links into the NCBI taxonomy.)
Steve
> From: chris mungall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 15:38:07 -0700
> To: Steve Chervitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Alan Ruttenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Subject: Re: [BiONT][BioRD
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
Phillip Lord wrote:
>
> Matthew Cockerill wrote:
>> I agree that the details of gene function probably don't belong on
>> Wikipedia.
>>
>>
>>
>> It's at least conceivable that Wikipedia may play an important role
>> in providing widely accepted identifiers for such high level classes
>> and i
