RE: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

: public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Graham Matthews Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 1:30 PM To: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org Subject: RE: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers IMHO, if you're still coding the content

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Graham -- You wrote *Who cares about readability of SPARQL queries? No-one is going to be writing SPARQL queries. The tools should allow us to work at much higher levels of abstraction than queries, and then the tool spits out the right SPARQL query. The humans never see it. And those who do look

RE: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

> IMHO, if you're still coding the content of an information system by hand, > then you're going to introduce errors. A database curator should never assign > their own identifier - this is internal to the technology and the information > system. If you're a programmer, you should query the reso

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Nice presentation Adrian. On Jun 21, 2011, at 7:26 AM, Adrian Walker wrote: > Oops... Bad link correction: > > Slides 51-52 of > www.reengineeringllc.com/Internet_Business_Logic_e-Government_Presentation.pdf > > Apologies, -- Adrian > > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Adrian Walker >

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

I'm jumping in here mid stream, with a back log of emails unread, but just wanted to bring in something to think about, from another discipline. Aviation. English is the standard language world wide. And this helps keep air traffic safe (there are language issues and there are incidences, but

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Hi, I think there is some confusion going on on the subject. We need to name things in an unique way. In many cases codes are just the best option. No wonder we all have tax-codes and the like, it's easier than to try to find a unique name based on some attributes. The case of terminologies is a

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

FYI, the rationale behind the use of identifiers for SNOMED-CT (ironically enough, given this thread) was to allow for some organizational semantics to be embedded in them. See: http://www.ihtsdo.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Docs_01/Publications/SNOMED_CT/SNOMED_CT_Identifiers_v1.0.pdf [[[ The Sct

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Other standards (outside of semantic web) saw the need to rely on numeric identifiers, even if that created a burden for their users e.g. in SNOMED Lung = T-28000 Of course it is a pain to query SNOMED with "all the diseases that affect T-28000". But the fact is that despite the inconvenience of h

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

org] On Behalf Of Sivaram Arabandi, MD > > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 6:14 PM > > To: M. Scott Marshall > > Cc: Chime Ogbuji; Andrea Splendiani; mmvagn...@mdanderson.org; James > > Malone; HCLS; Jonathan Rees > > Subject: Re: My task from last week: Semantic fr

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

I think all those who suggested "semantic-less" or "meaning-less" identifiers should come out and define what they mean by "semantics/meaning". Does a URI "http://example.com/foo#good"; carries the semantics of *good* as how the word "good" is defined in an English dictionary? Unless there is a sp

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Oops... Bad link correction: Slides 51-52 of www.reengineeringllc.com/Internet_Business_Logic_e-Government_Presentation.pdf Apologies, -- Adrian On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Adrian Walker wrote: > Hi All, > > Sorry to come in so late to this discussion but > > It would seem that the m

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Hi All, Sorry to come in so late to this discussion but It would seem that the meaning that resides in the application (or in a SPARQL query) should be part of the discussion. Even if the data identifiers have really fine readable meanings, an application can change the semantics completely.

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

If you want to work with a more sophisticated API - I might suggest the OWL API. It's more powerful, but also more sophisticated +1!! Mark

RE: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

From: Sivaram Arabandi, MD [mailto:sivaram.araba...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 8:42 PM To: Andrea Splendiani Cc: Michel_Dumontier; Chime Ogbuji; andrea splendiani (RRes-Roth); Vagnoni,Matthew M; James Malone; HCLS Subject: Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers On

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

I would argue that "shooting oneself in the foot" may not be as much an issue as the one Wikipedia got into when it assigned personal names to topics, only to find there were others with the same name equally worthy of a topic. Jack On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Pat Hayes wrote: > If I might

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

If I might summarize this debate, the arguments for using opaque and meaningless identifiers seem very similar to the argument that since there is a danger of shooting oneself in the foot, that therefore it is best to prevent this by having all feet surgically removed at birth. Still, HCLS is,

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

>> From: public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org >> [mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sivaram Arabandi, >> MD >> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 3:56 PM >> To: Chime Ogbuji >> Cc: Andrea Splendiani; Vagnoni,Matthew M; James Malone; HCLS

RE: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

> Perhaps I'm getting the feeling that the different points of view reflects > a > different perception of OWL vs RDF ? > Just a thought. I'm much more likely to move triples via scripts than using > a tool. > > ciao, > Andrea You're partly right. I don't look at RDF/XML or turtle when I repres

RE: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

..@w3.org<mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org> [mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sivaram Arabandi, MD Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 3:56 PM To: Chime Ogbuji Cc: Andrea Splendiani; Vagnoni,Matthew M; James Malone; HCLS Subject: Re: My task from last week: Semanti

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

t; To: M. Scott Marshall >> Cc: Chime Ogbuji; Andrea Splendiani; mmvagn...@mdanderson.org; James >> Malone; HCLS; Jonathan Rees >> Subject: Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers >> >> Consider the following: >> >> 1. Readability - the for

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

> > requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sivaram Arabandi, MD > > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 6:14 PM > > To: M. Scott Marshall > > Cc: Chime Ogbuji; Andrea Splendiani; mmvagn...@mdanderson.org; James > > Malone; HCLS; Jonathan Rees > > Subject: Re: My task from

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

> m. > > From: public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org > [mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sivaram Arabandi, > MD > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 3:56 PM > To: Chime Ogbuji > Cc: Andrea Splendiani; Vagnoni,Matthew M; James Malone; HCLS > Subject:

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

; Cc: Chime Ogbuji; Andrea Splendiani; mmvagn...@mdanderson.org; James > > Malone; HCLS; Jonathan Rees > > Subject: Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers > > > > Consider the following: > > > > 1. Readability - the former is far more readable than the lat

RE: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Of Sivaram Arabandi, MD > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 6:14 PM > To: M. Scott Marshall > Cc: Chime Ogbuji; Andrea Splendiani; mmvagn...@mdanderson.org; James > Malone; HCLS; Jonathan Rees > Subject: Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers > > Consider the following:

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

I agree with Chime points. I will add that the great missing feature or tool is versioning and depreciation handling. I had a customer see a GUID URI once and freak out and almost drop a contract. Readability and maintainability is important. Enforcing uniqueness in literals is not part of the

RE: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

sci-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sivaram Arabandi, MD Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 3:56 PM To: Chime Ogbuji Cc: Andrea Splendiani; Vagnoni,Matthew M; James Malone; HCLS Subject: Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers I couldn't "agree" more with Andrea and Chime on this

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Consider the following: 1. Readability - the former is far more readable than the later: RO:part_of vs. - this becomes even more apparent in a triple (CO = a 'Cardiology Ontology'): CO:Mitral_valve

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Hello, On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 4:15 PM, M. Scott Marshall wrote: > The main reason is that when semantics and natural language are > inserted into identifiers, some identifers are doomed to become stale > as thinking evolves or changes about the semantic representation. Doesn't the defini

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Il giorno 20/giu/2011, alle ore 22.40, Chime Ogbuji ha scritto: > Hey Scott. Thanks for the detailed reply. See my response inline below > On Monday, June 20, 2011 at 4:15 PM, M. Scott Marshall wrote: > >> Hi Chime, >> >> The main reason is that when semantics and natural language are >> insert

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Hey Scott. Thanks for the detailed reply. See my response inline below On Monday, June 20, 2011 at 4:15 PM, M. Scott Marshall wrote: > Hi Chime, > > The main reason is that when semantics and natural language are > inserted into identifiers, some identifers are doomed to become stale > as thinkin

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

I couldn't "agree" more with Andrea and Chime on this one. And would like to see some good reason(s) for us to continue to be burdened by them. The standard answer - 'tooling can help in managing the readability aspects' has been heard several times, and yet everyone seems to pass around 'raw RD

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Hi Chime, The main reason is that when semantics and natural language are inserted into identifiers, some identifers are doomed to become stale as thinking evolves or changes about the semantic representation. Or when a new 'name brand' is created for that namespace: I think that the best example

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Re: reasons for semantic free identifiers I think it depends on how you are using your data + schema. It may be the case that, for the most part, taking for granted the URI fragment or even just the label for a class and predicate gets you very far. I think it probably does in a lot of cases. Exce

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:53:51 -0700, Matt Vagnoni wrote: I tend to believe that "Perfect is the Enemy of Good". Then perhaps my hesitance (where I suggested that my own argument was possibly spurious) is a workable "Good" middle-ground? The identifier doesn't HAVE to be opaque, so long

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

I think the point is not "having to use names". There are cases where IDs are just the best options (see my tax number). It's that in some case, and again, I had some use case in mind which is more "in the wild" than biomedical ontologies... if we want to define property for something that is more

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:53:51 -0700, Matt Vagnoni wrote: If instead we put the entire burden on the UI (and make the problem one solvable by a product) we could have some sort of Code Complete/Label Lookup, that you could start typing a label and it would offer suggestions? Nothing exist

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Ok, let me take half a step back and make one provocative statement: the step back: I was actually thinking more about something like GoodRelations, rather than biomedical ontologies. I have to admit the second is a more controlled environment. The provocative statement: If the bit about multilin

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

> > When applied to instances (but not to Classes and Predicates) I am less > adverse to having non-semantic identifiers. Still, I haven't seen a really > good reason why that exceeds all the reasons to use semantic identifiers. > > Example number 2: hypothetical protein domains ( http://en.wiki

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Hello, On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Helena Deus wrote: >> thing"... By "right thing" I mean that I'm sure Hungarian semantic-webbers >> would have quite something to say about a decision to make the URI "partOf" >> rather than "A_0001" + multi-lingual labels.  It's a bit selfish of us >>

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

I tend to believe that "Perfect is the Enemy of Good". It seems that everyone agrees at some point you need semantic identifiers. Look at the RDF, RDFS, and OWL standards. They don't use non-semantic identifiers (alphanumeric/guids) for core Classes and Predicates. The English-centric standard

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Hi all, thing"... By "right thing" I mean that I'm sure Hungarian semantic-webbers > would have quite something to say about a decision to make the URI "partOf" > rather than "A_0001" + multi-lingual labels. It's a bit selfish of us > English-speakers to create global infrastructures just for our

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

On Monday, June 20, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Andrea Splendiani wrote: Hi, > sorry to jump on this thread like this... > > To be honest, I'm kind of concerned by the insistence on semantic-opaque > identifiers. I am as well and I have been for some time. > I understand the reason for them, > Actually,

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:08:43 -0700, Andrea Splendiani wrote: - in a continuum between web and semantic web, perhaps IDs are not only intended to be 'understood' by machines. Again, I understand the reason for them. But is it worth the reduced intuitiveness ? Or the added complexity to retai

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Hi, sorry to jump on this thread like this... To be honest, I'm kind of concerned by the insistence on semantic-opaque identifiers. I understand the reason for them, but I think they clash a bit with other considerations: - there is a lot of verbosity paid for having RDF 'readable'. Opaque identi

RE: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Consider this: SELECT ?name WHERE { ?s :contains :MRN; ?s a :Patient; rdfs:label ?name} --VERSE-- SELECT ?name WHERE { ?s ?p ?o; rdfs:label ?name. ?p rdfs:label "contains". ?o rdfs:label "Master Record Number". ?s a ?type.

RE: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

ssist-language-neutral-query-composer/ m. > -Original Message- > From: public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-semweb-lifesci- > requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of James Malone > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 4:47 AM > To: HCLS > Subject: My task from last week: Se

Re: My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

It is a burden to carry this prefix file and maintain it, but its better than not being able to do anything about it. ...from phone On Jun 20, 2011 3:47 AM, "James Malone" wrote: Hi, On last week's call I was tasked with contacting Chris and Alan regarding the form of the Relations Ontology UR

My task from last week: Semantic free identifiers

Hi, On last week's call I was tasked with contacting Chris and Alan regarding the form of the Relations Ontology URIs. There was some concern that the current text fragment (e.g. part_of) would be replaced with a semantic free identifier (e.g. RO_001). They confirmed this is the case. The