Oliver, (01)
Worth pointing out is that we (the NCBO team) don't feel that the current
BioPortal categorization is very good. It should probably not be used as
the basis for anything. There are external efforts to produce a
categorization system for the biomedical domain. We aren't taking the lead
in this categorization effort but if a standard (defacto or not) does
arise we would be interested in adapting our system to use it. (02)
Ray (03)
-----Original Message-----
From: oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Till Mossakowski
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 12:14 AM
To: oor-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Oliver Kutz
Subject: Re: [oor-forum] Categories for ontologies (04)
P.S. (05)
the interesting question is then: what happens if we federate BioPortal
with SOCoP? We need a taxonomy including all the involved categories, such
that in the ontology browser, all the BioPortal categories are combined
into one category "biology" (which can be expanded into the BioPortal
categories on demand). (06)
Till (07)
Am 29.05.2013 08:53, schrieb Till Mossakowski:
> Am 29.05.2013 00:29, schrieb John F Sowa:
>> On 5/28/2013 4:27 PM, Till Mossakowski wrote:
>>> After all, the user wants to use *one* ontology or classification
>>> system for classifying ontologies.
>>
>> What do you mean "one classification system"?
>
> In BioPortal, when the user uploads a new ontology, (s)he can provide
> some categories classifying the ontology. When browsing all
> ontologies, you can also filter them by category.
> The possible categories are: Animal Development, Biological Process,
> Human, Plant, Yeast, Cell etc. (Btw, not all categories returned by
> the REST service can be selected for browsing.) The OOR instance
> http://mercury-ncbo.ornl.gov seems to (erroneously) use the same
> categories In the OOR instance http://socop.oor.net, the categories
> are (exhaustive
> list): Commercial, Cultural, Defense, Financial, Geospatial,
> Government, Literature, Metadata, Other, Process, Provenance, Science,
> Social Networking, Standards, Technology, Upper Ontologies.
> I now just wonder what we should do for Ontohub.
>
>> The number of different kinds of ontologies, their purposes, goals,
>> applications, levels, logics, notations, uses, etc., is open-ended.
>>
>> Suppose that somebody asked you to compare Cyc to BFO to the Good
>> Relations ontology to schema.org. Where would you begin? And why?
>
> It is not about comparing ontologies. It is just that the "filter by
> category" dropdown box on the browsing web page needs to show a finite
> list of options to the user...
>
> Best, Till
> (08)
--
Prof. Dr. Till Mossakowski Cartesium, room 2.51 Phone +49-421-218-64226
DFKI GmbH Bremen Fax +49-421-218-9864226
Cyber-Physical Systems Till.Mossakowski@xxxxxxx
Enrique-Schmidt-Str. 5, D-28359 Bremen
http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~till/ (09)
Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Kuenstliche Intelligenz GmbH principal
office, *not* the address for mail etc.!!!:
Trippstadter Str. 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern management board: Prof.
Wolfgang Wahlster (chair), Dr. Walter Olthoff supervisory board: Prof.
Hans A. Aukes (chair) Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313 (010)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/
Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository (011)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/
Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository (012)
|