Ontology for the life sciences: genes, proteins, diseases, all expressed in OWL

Re:Ontology for the life sciences: genes, proteins, diseases... by mark_l_watson on Monday January 20, 2020 @07:16PM (#22103192)

Very nice!

I have a keen interest in the semantic web and linked data (I have written two books on the subject, and the current book I am writing on the Hy programming language also has linked data and knowledge representation examples).

Much of the most interesting work has been done in medicine and biology.

Off topic, but I am really split by wanting to use full graph databases vs. RDF/RDFS/OWL. Different but overlapping use cases.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ontology for the life sciences: genes, proteins, diseases... by chrismungall on Tuesday January 21, 2020 @09:48PM (#22114105)

> I am really split by wanting to use full graph databases vs. RDF/RDFS/OWL

I think having an alternative OWL->graph mapping that utilized the features of property graphs would help a lot with using non-RDF graph databases. The RDF layering is sub-optimal.

I wrote about this here: https://douroucouli.wordpress.com/2019/07/11/proposed-strate...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ontology for the life sciences: genes, proteins, diseases... by jerven on Tuesday January 21, 2020 @02:06AM (#22104877)

If you are in Bio the SPARQL usecase is just so nice. I work on the sparql.uniprot.org and others at SIB. Being able to federate without a hassle is such a powerful thing for research.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ontology for the life sciences: genes, proteins, diseases... by smadge on Monday January 20, 2020 @10:18PM (#22104032)

I suspect a lot of interesting work on semantic knowledge graphs has been done internally at FAANG and others, but the results are trade secrets.

[ Parent | on HN ]