What you begin to confront is the fact that if the ontologies were
isolated both in terms of not using a shared foundational ontology, there were
likely also isolated in the sense of not sharing "best practices" for
ontology construction:
-
many definitions ar
Yes - as you and Amit point out, there are many very successful applications and meta-analyses that have been performed with "isolated" ontologies.Where the difficultly comes in is when you want to: a) interlink the results from these separate studies b) formulate additional hypotheses based on the
But - it's not clear to me whether we'll be able to evolve highly
automated semantically-formal neuroinformatics analysis systems. I'm not
thinking of reasoning oriented systems, but simply analysis of semantic info a
la the ubiquitious use of Gene Ontology in the bio-molecular info
Personally I have seen/developed plenty of applications that use
domain specific/narrow ontologies but do not use any foundational/
top level ontologies.
Amit Sheth
Kashyap, Vipul wrote:
Great to hear that! It really seems that most of the promises of semantic
web ontologies are only realis
It is true statistical analysis of repositories expressing their semantics according to the same formal systems (e.g., RDFS, SKOS, OWL, etc.) utilized a metathesaurus of heavily utilized terms can get you a long way - But - it's not clear to me whether we'll be able to evolve highly automated seman
Hi All,I think Chimezie and Matthias are definitely on the right path here.As I see it, the bottom-up approach to semantic KE/KR that SemWebTech is so suited to must be wedded to the top-down approach using an upper level ontology such as DOLCE or OBR (version of BFO designed for use in biology**).
> Great to hear that! It really seems that most of the promises of semantic
> web ontologies are only realised when top-level ontologies like DOLCE are
> used. Maybe we should evaluate the potential use of DOLCE or BFO for the
> BioRDF tasks?
[VK] Whereas I agree with the use of foundational ont
; From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chimezie Ogbuji
> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 10:08 PM
> To: Donald Doherty
> Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [HCLS] Bridging Ontologies - with Foundational Ontologies
>
>
I also think that smaller foundational ontologies like DOLCE are the key to
interoperability between ontologies. It seems like the only way to ensure good
interoperability is the agreement on some basic structures and design patterns.
When two OWL ontologies are based on two totally different w
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Donald Doherty wrote:
Creating explicit connections between all similar and/or identical entries
in two schemas is an arduous task that is impractical to do manually.
Actually, I recently had quite a good experience doing this same thing
with trying to align top-level
10 matches
Mail list logo
