[TAV-92] BioMOBY/mygrid ontology convergence Created: 2006-08-16 Updated: 2006-1017 Resolved: 2006-10-17
Status:
Project:
Component/s:
Affects
Version/s:
Fix Version/s:
Closed
myGrid
None
None
Type:
Reporter:
Resolution:
Labels:
Remaining
Estimate:
Time Spent:
Original
Estimate:
Improvement
June Finch (Inactive)
Fixed
None
Not Specified
1.5
Priority:
Assignee:
Votes:
Major
June Finch (Inactive)
0
Not Specified
Not Specified
Description
T2 requirement s7 - merge the ontologies in some way.
Comments
Comment by June Finch (Inactive) [ 2006-08-17 ]
Katy - can you add to the description to explain what work this might involve and what the
benefits are to help me prioritise please. Thanks. June.
Comment by Katy Wolstencroft [ 2006-08-17 ]
This is mostly at the level of the ontology model. Pinar has been working on merging the two so
that both projects can use the same service model (now in OWL and at this address
http://www.mygrid.org.uk/mygrid-moby-service/). We still have slightly different domain
models because there is a fundamental difference in the way we construct our descriptions. The
biomoby people like to chose a namespace and a resource database name seperately. We think
this adds extra complexity for bio users - eg for mygrid, genbank is a type of DNA sequence
database so it is just a subclass of DNA sequence database. In biomoby, you would chose the
namespace genbank and the database type DNA sequence database. Both work, but we were
worried people could select namespace/resource combinations that were invalid if we followed
their way of doing things.
The work left to do is really within feta - if we want to search a registry of biomoby services and
a registry of mygrid services, the queries a slightly different. I think Pinar has already written
the code, we just need to populate the descriptions to test it properly.
The connection between the two things is important, but most of the hard work has already been
done by Pinar.
Comment by Pinar Alper [ 2006-09-11 ]
As Katy has pointed out we are now using a common single "Service Ontology". so this task is
completed. Having a common ontology allows us to share our service descriptions and also
share any tooling that operates over this OWL (essentially RDFS ) model.
For example myGrid could use parts of the Biomoby dashboard or biomoby could use the Feta
Engine backend to search over services.
Pedro does not operate over RDF(S) hence it is not sharable in this context.
The predicates in the service ontology are combined with terms from the domain ontology to
generate service descriptions. Biomoby and myGrid have different domain ontologies.
Generated at Wed Feb 10 06:41:48 GMT 2016 using JIRA 6.1.2#6157sha1:98c729218aad6de1537eb8e98889ee5562c90d96.