Please move all further discussion to the SPM list at TDWG (tdwg-spm@lists.tdwg.org) so that we can be more inclusive and ensure that items are archived for future reference. We should also start making use of the SPM wiki again (http://wiki.tdwg.org/SPM/) as the focal point for sharing information.
Éamonn
-----Original Message----- From: Bob Morris [mailto:morris.bob@gmail.com] Sent: 08 July 2008 06:58 To: Markus Döring Cc: Terry Catapano; Dave Thau; Roger Hyam; Eamonn O Tuama Subject: Re: Broken SPM in TDWG repo
Thanks. Current looks OK as to RDF. It, and parts (all?) of the LSID voc and the TDWG core are OWL Full when they are meant to be and probably easily could be OWL DL. Possibly nobody but me and Dave Thau care about such things right now....Certainly it doesn't impede plazi's project to generate SPM from TaxonX.
The Manchester Wonder Web OWL Species Validator pointed out to me by Dave gives lots of hints that are probably easy to address. See http://www.mygrid.org.uk/OWL/Validator Some "FIXME" notes in core ontolgies seem to suggest that Roger knew this and ran out of time to address it. Most issues seem to be lack of explicit typing and lack of separation of classes from instances. See also http://wonderweb.semanticweb.org/owl/rdf.shtml. I'll look into it at my leisure.
More important is to get some discussion going about the InfoItems.
Bob
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 6:58 AM, Markus Döring mdoering@gbif.org wrote:
thanks bob, I am moving between different machines currently so I dont have much software installed. It should be changed now, would you mind to make sure its ok like this? it is valid rdf according to w3c. markus
On Jul 4, 2008, at 5:22 AM, Bob Morris wrote:
Thanks.
You need to change the prefixes 'tbase' to 'base' in the InfoItems you moved. 'tbase' has no namespace associated with it in the SPMInfoItem file.
Bob
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Markus Döring mdoering@gbif.org wrote:
Ive updated the files in the repo, removing duplicate InfoItems in the SPMInfoItem file. markus
On Jul 3, 2008, at 2:32 PM, Eamonn O Tuama wrote:
Thanks, Markus, for undertaking this. I think following Bob's proposal is the way to proceed. The original list of InfoItem categories as agreed at the SPM workshop is more or less what is in the main list at http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems.rdf . But I agree that it would be good to re-visit this to see if it can be improved.
Regards,
Éamonn
-----Original Message----- From: Markus Döring [mailto:mdoering@gbif.org] Sent: 03 July 2008 14:20 To: Bob Morris Cc: Terry Catapano; Eamonn O Tuama; Roger Hyam; Gregor Hagedorn;
Patrick
Leary Subject: Re: Broken SPM in TDWG repo
Bob, the SPMInfoItems.rdf file was an alternative to the fewer infoitems listed in the SpeciesProfileModel.rdf The discussion about which items we really need was never finished as far as I am aware. So thats why there are duplicates and non consitent names between the two files.
I agree it would be better to keep the core SpeciesModelProfile free of this issue and move all InfoItem classes to the separate file. If noone objects I will change the SVN according to Bobs proposal. And it would be good to get a discussion started about the basic infoitems that TDWG should provide.
Markus
On Jul 2, 2008, at 6:03 AM, Bob Morris wrote:
I had a pass at fixing the breakage in the current SPM. See http://wiki.tdwg.org/twiki/bin/view/SPM/BrokenSpm
It would be really good if this or something like it got into the SVN repo and be served (and critiqued...). If somebody gives me SVN URL and prvilege, I will do it. Meanwhile, I suggest we work with what I put on the wiki.
Bob
-- Robert A. Morris Professor of Computer Science UMASS-Boston ram@cs.umb.edu http://bdei.cs.umb.edu/ http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram/calendar.html phone (+1)617 287 6466
-- Robert A. Morris Professor of Computer Science UMASS-Boston ram@cs.umb.edu http://bdei.cs.umb.edu/ http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram/calendar.html phone (+1)617 287 6466