This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

Difference between revisions of "Ecoterm"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 5: Line 5:
 
=== [[Ecoterm:Construction|Construction]] ===
 
=== [[Ecoterm:Construction|Construction]] ===
  
=== Data Model ===
+
=== [[Ecoterm:Data Model|Data Model]] ===
* Data model influences design of
 
** data publication formats
 
** programmatic interfaces
 
* Data model also determines management and maintenance strategies and procedures
 
* Data model often implicit in a standard, not formally specified …
 
** E.g. BS 8723, ANSI Z39.19
 
* Some ‘standards’ to consider …
 
** ANSI Z39.19, BS 8723
 
*** "Traditional thesaurus" ...
 
*** model described in prose by BS 8723, ANSI Z39.19
 
*** Only terms reified, concepts implicit
 
  
** SKOS Core
+
=== [[Ecoterm:Publication|Publication]] ===
*** Explicitly concept-oriented data model
 
*** Specified formally using RDFS/OWL
 
  
** OWL
+
=== [[Ecoterm:Services|Services]] ===
*** Class/instance-oriented model (“ontologies”)
+
----
*** Formally specified via model-theoretic semantics
+
=== Steps toward interoperability ===
 +
 
 +
[http://ftp.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/uri/rfc2396.txt URI's]
 +
----
 +
# Use URIs
 +
# Use URIs well (consistency, persistence, articulated management & maintenance policies etc.)
 +
# Be clear about what a URI identifies
 +
#* Concepts? Classes? Something else?
 +
# Publish [http://www.w3.org/RDF/ RDF] descriptions of the things you are identifying
 +
# Use ‘well-established’ RDF vocabularies as far as possible, extend as appropriate
 +
# make commitments to maintaining RDF descriptions, and publish maintenance policies and procedures
  
** TMF - Terminology Markup Framework ISO 16642 (ISO TC 37)
+
Establish a semantic web of terminological / conceptual / ontological data relating to the environment
*** Concept-oriented
+
 
*** Specified using UML
+
[[User:Hsolbrig|Hsolbrig]] N.B. [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swls-ws/2004Sep/att-0013/MayoBMIPosition.html Mayo Position Paper on LSID's] describes how URI's are described in HL7 and elsewhere<br>
*** Really a framework for designing XML formats
+
[[User:Hsolbrig|Hsolbrig]] N.B. The [http://www.bio-itworld.com/archive/011204/lsid.html Life Sciences Identifier (LSID)] and the [[http://lsid.sourceforge.net/] LSID Project] are different, but related.<br>
  
** ISO Topic Maps
 
*** Topics, Associations, Occurrences, Roles...
 
----
 
Comments:
 
* ANSI Z39.19, BS 8723, SKOS Core, TMF broadly aligned …
 
* (I.e. T-O vs. C-O not necessarily at odds)
 
**  however N.B. choice of T-O vs. C-O model as foundation has implications for management/maintenance and URI use.
 
* Relationship to ontologies (OWL) … ?
 
* Topic maps … ?
 
  
  
 +
Services
 
----
 
----
 +
* With a web of data in place, the role of services becomes extremely clear: to provide efficient, convenient, programmatic Interaction with subsets of that web of data.
 +
* Build a service-oriented architecture on top of a web of data
  
=== Publication ===
+
* Steps to achieving this:
* General principle: publish data
+
 
* XML
+
# Analyse and publish functional requirements for service types (I.e. what do I want a service to do?)
** Thesaurus tradition (e.g. Zthes …)
+
# Study functional requirements within this community, identify and publish sets of common requirements (basis for standardisation work)
** Terminology (I.e. TC 37) tradition (e.g. TBX, implementation of TMF)
+
# Take a look at [http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20041012/ SPARQL] services & protocol (v. cheap)
** Topic maps tradition … XTM
 
* RDF
 
** SKOS Core
 
** RDFS/OWL
 
* OWL
 
** Based on RDF
 
** Ontologies for the web
 
** W3C recommendation
 
* Comments
 
**  N.B. XTM and anything based on RDF (I.e. SKOS Core, OWL) designed for a distributed information environment
 
*** I.e. use URIs, support data linking, merging
 
** Others not (designed for point-to-point transfer)
 
----
 
  
=== Services ===
+
** N.B. true standardisation of a service interface requires a (lightweight, informal, open) community-driven process for developing a web-service specification and building consensus
* Service Oriented Architecture (SOA)
 
** Important software engineering paradigm
 
* Web services
 
** WSDL, SOAP (W3C)
 
* Web service interface to conceptual/terminological resource …
 
Lots of individual projects (EOS, UNEP.Net …)
 
* Standardisation initiatives …
 
** Some recent work on implementing the SKOS API …
 
** … but still plenty of issues.
 
** OMG lexicon query service?
 
** HL7 Common Terminology Services (CTS)
 
** ANSI terminology services API?
 
** XMDR?
 
** Other attempts to build consensus?
 
* N.B.
 
** SOA & WS architecture for distributing programmatic components
 
** Semantic Web machinery architecture for distributing data
 
** Complementary
 
*** E.g. a service that provides efficient programmatic access to an aggregation of data harvested from multiple published sources
 

Latest revision as of 20:27, 22 April 2005

Action Points for the Following Year

The following points are based on a presentation by Alistair Miles at the 2005 Berlin Ecoinformatics meeting.

Identity

Construction

Data Model

Publication

Services


Steps toward interoperability

URI's


  1. Use URIs
  2. Use URIs well (consistency, persistence, articulated management & maintenance policies etc.)
  3. Be clear about what a URI identifies
    • Concepts? Classes? Something else?
  4. Publish RDF descriptions of the things you are identifying
  5. Use ‘well-established’ RDF vocabularies as far as possible, extend as appropriate
  6. make commitments to maintaining RDF descriptions, and publish maintenance policies and procedures

Establish a semantic web of terminological / conceptual / ontological data relating to the environment

Hsolbrig N.B. Mayo Position Paper on LSID's describes how URI's are described in HL7 and elsewhere
Hsolbrig N.B. The Life Sciences Identifier (LSID) and the [[1] LSID Project] are different, but related.


Services


  • With a web of data in place, the role of services becomes extremely clear: to provide efficient, convenient, programmatic Interaction with subsets of that web of data.
  • Build a service-oriented architecture on top of a web of data
  • Steps to achieving this:
  1. Analyse and publish functional requirements for service types (I.e. what do I want a service to do?)
  2. Study functional requirements within this community, identify and publish sets of common requirements (basis for standardisation work)
  3. Take a look at SPARQL services & protocol (v. cheap)
    • N.B. true standardisation of a service interface requires a (lightweight, informal, open) community-driven process for developing a web-service specification and building consensus