[tdwg-tag] Re: TDM Ontology
Robert.Morris at cs.umb.edu
Fri May 4 19:16:30 CEST 2007
Renato De Giovanni wrote:
> Anyway, I'm not quite familiar with species-level data sources. From the
> previous messages, it seems that the main reason for using the generic
> tagging approach is that most data sources will have chunks of text
> including information about one or more TDM categories, and it will be
> impractical to separate this information in a more structured way. Did I
> understand the problem correctly?
Yes, but it is worse. Many such sources have \both/ textual---but
categorized---data and structured data. And both may need ontological
mapping so that both machine integration and human display applications
have a chance of putting together the right stuff and also not ignoring
what the client wishes not be ignored.
> In this case, then you're right that it would be interesting if someone
> could investigate this a bit more, make some tests and give us a more
> practical feedback. If most participants of the species model workshop
> have this kind of database, maybe they could try to map their fields to
> the TDM categories.
I am presently doing some of that, albeit first trying to hand code some
instances with Protege and Altova SemanticWorks. I guess the interesting
part will come for stuff that \doesn't/ map well. At the moment, I am
somewhat at a loss for what our intent was in this case, but maybe in
another few hours I will have figured that out. ...
> Best Regards,
Robert A. Morris
Professor of Computer Science
phone (+1)617 287 6466
More information about the tdwg-tag