t: Re: [BIORDF] Re: Unstructured vs. Structured (was: HL7 and
> patient records in RDF/OWL?)
>
>
>
> To follow up on this, do you think it would be possible to create a
> generic GRDDL transformation that would extract information from any
> well-structured XHTML table, using
To follow up on this, do you think it would be possible to create a
generic GRDDL transformation that would extract information from any
well-structured XHTML table, using the scoped row and column
headers?
alf.
On 19 Feb 2006, at 15:07, Alf Eaton wrote:
I've been trying to decide on
>As part of a semantic web for data integration experiment(submitted
for
>publishing), I adapted/hacked the Mapper program[1] to convert tabular
>data from a web source (ENCODE at UCSC, in csv format) to (our) RDF
>format ala YeastHub. Mapper can read from several common formats and
>database conn
YeastHub (http://yeasthub.gersteinlab.org) provides an interactive web
interface to allow the user to register and map a web-accessible tabular
dataset into RDF/XML. If needed, we can turn this interactive interface
into a programmatic one to allow broader use.
As part of a semantic web for
>Using RDF, one obvious graph model is to make each cell a bnode of
some
>type (e.g., "gene expression measurement"), and link it to one column
node
>and one row node. The result is not directly a list of lists, but a
unique
>projection mapping of two ordinate nodes: a web of cells to be exact.
>
Hi,
I found the following link interesting, as it describes several ways of
mapping a table to RDF:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/reports/scalable_rdbms_mapping_report/#sec-mapping
YeastHub (http://yeasthub.gersteinlab.org) provides an interactive web
interface to allow the user to regis
in an immediate
> >>> sense, with a demonstration of how to generate
> RDF
> >> from an Excel
> >>> spreadsheet. I think I'll just start saying
> >> "Excel spreadsheet" and
> >>> forget about the term that we use internally to
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Christopher
Cavnor
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 3:54 PM
To: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Subject: Re: Unstructured vs. Structured (was: HL7
and patient records
in RDF/OWL?)
I'd argue that most information resources are
indeed semi-structur
ary 14, 2006 1:54 PM
> To: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Unstructured vs. Structured (was: HL7 and
> patient records in RDF/OWL?)
>
>
>
> I'd argue that most information resources are indeed
> semi-structured. The
> human brain is only able to meta
Matthew Cockerill wrote:
> I couldn't agree more.
>
> Spreadsheets (and equivalently, CSV files) are a large fraction of
> the 'additional datafiles' that BioMed Central receives from authors.
>
> What would be great would be to be able to define some simple
> standards and/or templates which au
> Spreadsheets (and equivalently, CSV files) are a large fraction of
> the 'additional datafiles' that BioMed Central receives from authors.
>
> What would be great would be to be able to define some simple
> standards and/or templates which authors could follow in their
> spreadsheets,
om: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher
Cavnor
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 3:54 PM
To: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Subject: Re: Unstructured vs. Structured (was: HL7 and patient records
in RDF/OWL?)
I'd argue that most information resources are indee
, February 14, 2006 3:54 PM
To: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Subject: Re: Unstructured vs. Structured (was: HL7 and patient records
in RDF/OWL?)
I'd argue that most information resources are indeed semi-structured.
The human brain is only able to meta-categorize resources based on its
struct
is is the first I have heard the term used in
> that sense, but maybe I just don't run in the right circles.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Hendler
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 3:43 PM
> To: Pat Haye
ng
Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Subject: Re: Unstructured vs. Structured (was: HL7 and patient records
in RDF/OWL?)
At 14:46 -0600 2/13/06, Pat Hayes wrote:
>>
>>The point I'm trying to make is this: The concept of "structuredness"
>>is relative and context-sensi
> >The point I'm trying to make is this: The concept of
> "structuredness"
> >is relative and context-sensitive.
I don't think anyone will doubt the definition of "structured or not" is not
relative and context-sensitive.
When I first raise my "confusion" (not "objection") over Davide's
"unst
At 14:46 -0600 2/13/06, Pat Hayes wrote:
The point I'm trying to make is this: The concept of "structuredness" is
relative and context-sensitive.
Hear, hear. Well said.
Pat Hayes
I second that. Yong revived an important point. In the SW October meeting
a year+ ago the importance of
At 14:46 -0600 2/13/06, Pat Hayes wrote:
The point I'm trying to make is this: The concept of "structuredness" is
relative and context-sensitive.
Hear, hear. Well said.
Pat Hayes
FWIW, Structured, unstructured and
semi-structured, although non-precise concepts
in common language and (
At 14:46 -0600 2/13/06, Pat Hayes wrote:
The point I'm trying to make is this: The concept of "structuredness" is
relative and context-sensitive.
Hear, hear. Well said.
Pat Hayes
FWIW, Structured, unstructured and semi-structured, although
non-precise concepts in common language and (es
The point I'm trying to make is this: The concept of "structuredness" is
relative and context-sensitive.
Hear, hear. Well said.
Pat Hayes
--
-
IHMC(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home
40 South Alcaniz St.
Welll ... Maybe. I see your point, but I think nonetheless that there
are some important distinctions to be made within what you are calling
non-RDF. On one extreme one has highly structured data in relational
databases. One key here is that the data definitions are contained in
machine readabl
o.
Davide
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Madden
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 4:26 PM
To: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Subject: Re: Unstructured vs. Structured (was: HL7 and patient
records in
RDF/OWL?)
This discussion is fine, but le
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Madden
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 4:26 PM
To: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Subject: Re: Unstructured vs. Structured (was: HL7 and patient records in
RDF/OWL?)
This discussion is fine, but let me bring this back to GRDDL
This discussion is fine, but let me bring this back to GRDDL.
GRDDL could be used to specify ways of generating RDF from many kinds
of XML documents. The documents could be data-oriented XML, or text-
oriented XML, or even (I think this is accurate, Eric?) could be
documents with very spars
24 matches
Mail list logo
