Ciao,
> Andrea
>
> -Original Message-
> From: public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org
> [mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Oliver Ruebenacker
> Sent: 02 February 2010 12:51
> To: John Madden
> Cc: w3c semweb HCLS
> Subject: Re: When does a docu
: Solbrig, Harold R.; John Madden; w3c semweb HCLS
Cc: Chimezie Ogbuji
Subject: RE: When does a document acquire (web) semantics?
Sorry, what's the AAA principle ?
It seems to me ignoring is not a problem. In case, thinking that you
don't ignore anything is against the SemWeb framew
Hello Andrea,
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:41 AM, andrea splendiani (RRes-Roth)
wrote:
> What is "meaning" for you ?
That's precisely what I am trying to find out.
Take care
Oliver
--
Oliver Ruebenacker, Computational Cell Biologist
Systems Biology Linker at Virtual Cell (http:/
w3.org] On Behalf Of Solbrig, Harold R.
Sent: 02 February 2010 15:18
To: John Madden; w3c semweb HCLS
Cc: Chimezie Ogbuji
Subject: RE: When does a document acquire (web) semantics?
The AAA principle that forms one of the underlying pillars of much of
the semantic web work does not necessarily work in s
ao,
Andrea
-Original Message-
From: public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org
[mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Oliver Ruebenacker
Sent: 02 February 2010 12:51
To: John Madden
Cc: w3c semweb HCLS
Subject: Re: When does a document acquire (web) semantics?
Hello,
W
Agree with Mark.
Only how I wish there was ONE physicians' ontology.
Added problem is it changes rapidly with time.
rakesh
http://peoplesgroup.academia.edu/RakeshBiswas
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Mark Wilkinson wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:08:38 -0800, Danny Ayers
> wrote:
>
> Peter, I
Chime,
Thank you, thank you! This helps a great deal.
Give me a bit to digest this pattern and try it out
John
On Feb 2, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote:
> On 2/2/10 8:25 AM, "John Madden" wrote:
>> In the interim, the closest we can come to named graphs currently seems to be
>>
On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:08:38 -0800, Danny Ayers
wrote:
Peter, I agree with 99% of what you said but this bit bothers me a bit:
People regularly misinterpret medical documents currently by examining
them without the proper medical training. Adding superclasses etc or
deleting elements as th
On 2/2/10 8:25 AM, "John Madden" wrote:
> In the interim, the closest we can come to named graphs currently seems to be
> the RDF document as a unit of communication. Most of the work in HCLS has so
> far has focused on the benefits you can get from aggregation, i.e. from
> specifically treating R
[mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of John Madden
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 9:04 AM
To: w3c semweb HCLS
Cc: Chimezie Ogbuji
Subject: Re: When does a document acquire (web) semantics?
Chime,
Agreed.
Another question is whether any particular RDF representation *sh
I am a little bit slow because I don't really know what is the argument?
Is their essential difference between
(1) A user performs an act of interpretation
(2) A user executes a SPARQL query
Isn't "execution of SPARQL query" an "act of interpretation"? I think
so, hence I don't know what is the
Chime,
Agreed.
Another question is whether any particular RDF representation *should* carry
any authority.
To take the most trivial and unproblematic case, suppose the author is just
plain unskilled at rendering his meaning as triples. Maybe his RDF is junk.
Maybe we should ignore it.
You mi
On 2/2/10 8:25 AM, "John Madden" wrote:
> This makes it rather difficult to use RDF in clinical care. With English
> language documents, we reject those that are not signed and original (or
> faithful copies of the signed original) for purposes of clinical care. But in
> the SW world, there is no
Oliver,
Great response.
I'd suggest that one component of a meaning detector would be a program that
converts the English language text of the document into a set of triples (i.e.
a grddl transform). However, it would not seem that this is the complete
construction of the meaning detector, si
>> Is this a possible scenario? Where does it fail? Is it that the SemWeb
>> doesn't support any notion of an "official" graph? Is it that there is no
>> such thing as an "official graph" at all (on the sem web or anywhere else)?
>
> It doesn't, and there isn't. The SWeb position on official is
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Oliver Ruebenacker wrote:
> Hello,
>
> When asking for a practical example, I was more concerned about the
> consumer rather than the producer of data. It is easy to claim some
> data has meaning, but the question is to what extend that meaning can
> be appreci
Hello,
When asking for a practical example, I was more concerned about the
consumer rather than the producer of data. It is easy to claim some
data has meaning, but the question is to what extend that meaning can
be appreciated by others.
Why don't we build a little meaning detector. Som
On Feb 1, 2010, at 3:53 PM, John Madden wrote:
Hi Oliver,
I don't want to speak for Eric, and I'm not even sure I've
accurately represented his point here. Nor am I sure that they *are*
different scenarios.
Instead of saying they are or aren't, let me throw out a scenario
that concerns
bad news.
>
>
>> Davide
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Danny Ayers [mailto:danny.ay...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 9:11 PM
>> To: Davide Zaccagnini
>> Cc: Peter Ansell; Andrea Splendiani; John Madden; w3c semweb HCLS; Eri
On 2 February 2010 04:30, Joanne Luciano wrote:
>>> . I suppose what I'm saying is we have to allow for ignorance
>>> in these systems, which is virtually impossible to express, even in
>>> OWL.
>
>
> Ignorance can be expressed in at least 2 ways in OWL... Disclaimer: this is
> off the top of my h
ent: Monday, February 01, 2010 9:11 PM
To: Davide Zaccagnini
Cc: Peter Ansell; Andrea Splendiani; John Madden; w3c semweb HCLS;
Eric Prud'hommeaux
Subject: Re: When does a document acquire (web) semantics?
I'm sorry Davide, but your description seems to put this stuff at an
unambiguou
ohn Madden; w3c semweb HCLS; Eric
> Prud'hommeaux
> Subject: Re: When does a document acquire (web) semantics?
>
> I'm sorry Davide, but your description seems to put this stuff at an
> unambiguous level, but we all know that's not true. The practitioners
> ma
ini
Cc: Peter Ansell; Andrea Splendiani; John Madden; w3c semweb HCLS; Eric
Prud'hommeaux
Subject: Re: When does a document acquire (web) semantics?
I'm sorry Davide, but your description seems to put this stuff at an
unambiguous level, but we all know that's not true. The practitioners
t; From: public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org
> [mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Peter Ansell
> Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 6:41 PM
> To: Andrea Splendiani
> Cc: John Madden; w3c semweb HCLS; Eric Prud'hommeaux
> Subject: Re: When does a document a
[mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Peter Ansell
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 6:41 PM
To: Andrea Splendiani
Cc: John Madden; w3c semweb HCLS; Eric Prud'hommeaux
Subject: Re: When does a document acquire (web) semantics?
I agree completely!
Cheers,
Peter
On 2 Feb
I agree completely!
Cheers,
Peter
On 2 February 2010 09:26, Andrea Splendiani
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think there are two aspects related to semantics.
> One is interpretation (like: the world is flat by Mark). And this is in the
> ontology or, if you want, even in queries.
> But there is also the
On 2 February 2010 09:08, Danny Ayers wrote:
> Peter, I agree with 99% of what you said but this bit bothers me a bit:
>
>
>> People regularly misinterpret medical documents currently by examining
>> them without the proper medical training. Adding superclasses etc or
>> deleting elements as they
Hi,
I think there are two aspects related to semantics.
One is interpretation (like: the world is flat by Mark). And this is in the
ontology or, if you want, even in queries.
But there is also the fact that you "name" things when you expose a resource.
The resource itself, or some info in more d
Peter, I agree with 99% of what you said but this bit bothers me a bit:
> People regularly misinterpret medical documents currently by examining
> them without the proper medical training. Adding superclasses etc or
> deleting elements as they feel necessary is just formalising the
> process wher
On 2 February 2010 08:16, Jim McCusker wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 4:53 PM, John Madden wrote:
>>
>> Hi Oliver,
>> (For a medical document, it might not be *me* that insists on this
>> claim; it might be my employer/hospital.
>> They don't want people attributing meanings to the
On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:16:30 -0800, Jim McCusker
wrote:
The employer/hospital cannot prohibit someone else's
ignorance.
sigh... how true!! ;-)
Mark
--
Mark D Wilkinson, PI Bioinformatics
Assistant Professor, Medical Genetics
The James Hogg iCAPTURE Centre for Cardiovascular and Pulm
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 4:53 PM, John Madden wrote:
> Hi Oliver,
>(For a medical document, it might not be *me* that insists on this
> claim; it might be my employer/hospital.
>They don't want people attributing meanings to the document other
> than those they have had a chance
>
Hi Oliver,
I don't want to speak for Eric, and I'm not even sure I've accurately
represented his point here. Nor am I sure that they *are* different scenarios.
Instead of saying they are or aren't, let me throw out a scenario that concerns
me, and in the context of which they *might* be differe
On 1 February 2010 19:30, John Madden wrote:
> We had an interesting call in TERM today. One of the topics I would like to
> boil down to the question "When does a document acquire its semantics?" or,
> "when does a document come to mean something?"
>
> I argued the (admittedly intentionally) ra
Hmmm, John,
I'm wondering what criteria you are using to evaluate the equivalence
of the result of the conversion function / algorithm.
I endeavor in my personal communication to separate observation from
judgment, which to me is roughly equivalent to representation and
semantic binding.
Pat, what a concidence! I keep getting those character strings too!
Sometimes I play a little game where I convert one of them into a different but
completely equivalent character string, and send it back to the original author.
I've noticed that sometimes the author responds to my string with a
Hello,
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:30 PM, John Madden wrote:
> We had an interesting call in TERM today. One of the topics I would like to
> boil down to the question "When does a document acquire its semantics?" or,
> "when does a document come to mean something?"
>
> I argued the (admittedl
I agree it was a great telcon today. I was glad to be on it.
And I love this conversation too.
Ya know what I mean? Wink Wink?
Does anyone ever know what the other means? Whew.
Allow me to quote one of the great minds:
"In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are
not
On Feb 1, 2010, at 1:26 PM, Mark Wilkinson wrote:
On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 11:12:35 -0800, Solbrig, Harold R. > wrote:
If, however, you wish to *communicate* with other folks about, say,
science, it would be highly desirable to overlay a *shared*
ontology-of-choice (vs. personal) that, perhaps,
On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 11:12:35 -0800, Solbrig, Harold R.
wrote:
If, however, you wish to *communicate* with other folks about, say,
science, it would be highly desirable to overlay a *shared*
ontology-of-choice (vs. personal) that, perhaps, would be focused on
shared knowledge about the re
-requ...@w3.org
[mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mark Wilkinson
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 1:05 PM
To: Jim McCusker; John Madden
Cc: w3c semweb HCLS; Eric Prud'hommeaux
Subject: Re: When does a document acquire (web) semantics?
I love this conversation :-)
I h
I love this conversation :-)
I have a scrap of paper pinned to the filing cabinet beside my desk that
says "The World Is Flat - Mark Wilkinson & Ben Good, in the Pub, May 26,
2006". That was the night that I feel I truly came to understand where
the "semantics" are in the "semantic web".
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:30 PM, John Madden wrote:
> We had an interesting call in TERM today. One of the topics I would like to
> boil down to the question "When does a document acquire its semantics?" or,
> "when does a document come to mean something?"
>
> I argued the (admittedly intentionall
Can we perform a mashup on the two positions?
Someone who created a SPARQL end point has, by some means, created an
interpretation (graph) to query based on some document. Perhaps other
SPARQL end points would have different interpretations?
Just a tenth EURO...
Jack
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:3
We had an interesting call in TERM today. One of the topics I would like to
boil down to the question "When does a document acquire its semantics?" or,
"when does a document come to mean something?"
I argued the (admittedly intentionally) radical view that documents have no
semantics whatsoever
45 matches
Mail list logo
