[tdwg-content] More Strange Monkey Business-like things in GBIF KOS Document

Shawn Bowers bowers at gonzaga.edu
Fri Feb 18 07:19:16 CET 2011


Great, thanks. This was my impression, but was starting to get confused.

I've read the Smith paper some time ago ... I'll go back and look
again at the inheres_in property. I have read about inheres_in in the
other papers on EQ -- but wasn't sure where it is defined.

Thanks again,

Shawn

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:12 PM, Hilmar Lapp <hlapp at nescent.org> wrote:
>
> On Feb 18, 2011, at 12:46 AM, Shawn Bowers wrote:
>
>> BTW. I'm a bit confused though -- is EQ an OWL ontology? Or is it
>> purely an abstract model that prescribes a convention for defining
>> qualities, with concrete quality and entity ontologies being drawn
>> from other places (like PATO)?
>
> It's an abstract model. It can be expressed and implemented in OWL (and also
> in OBO). It is model for defining phenotype classes (though indeed in this
> model an EQ phenotype (class) is a subclass if a quality (class)). The
> quality and entity terms are drawn from ontologies that exist independently
> of (and in part predate) EQ.
>
>> Where is the inheres_in property defined?
>
>
> In RO (the Relations Ontology, see Smith et al, 2005).
>
>        -hilmar
> --
> ===========================================================
> : Hilmar Lapp  -:- Durham, NC -:- informatics.nescent.org :
> ===========================================================
>
>
>
>


More information about the tdwg-content mailing list