[esip-semanticweb] posted initial version of ToolMatch data model

[Lynnes, Christopher S. (GSFC-6102)]

On Mar 1, 2012, at 5:29 PM, Eric Rozell wrote:

> The SPARQL would be really simple assuming we use some level of OWL 2 reasoning.  I think the use case should extend beyond "data accessibility" to include any attribute of a dataset.  There are probably some "explanation" tools out there that could handle all of these use cases.   In your example:
> 
> SPARQL query for what tools can draw a map of a dataset:
> 
> Assume you have a dataset URI (call it, myprefix:My_Dataset_URI)

Of course, we probably aren't starting from a dataset URI, but one of several possible identifiers, like a GCMD DIF Entry ID, for example, or a DOI.  SHould be able to add those as properties to the Dataset though, and add clauses to the SPARQL query to "join" them.
> 
> PREFIX ...
> SELECT    ?tool    WHERE    {
>     myprefix:My_Dataset_URI    toolmatch:mappedBy    ?tool    .
>     //alternatively:    ?tool    toolmatch:maps    myprefix:My_Dataset_URI   .
> }
> 
> Explanation for matching tool:
> 
> Assume the SPARQL query finds the URI of a tool that matches (call it, yourprefix:Your_Tool_URI)
> 
> We can construct a service that explains individual triples, such as:
> 
> PREFIX ...
> EXPLAIN    {
>     myprefix:My_Dataset_URI    toolmatch:mappedBy    yourprefix:Your_Tool_URI    .
> }
> 
> The result of this might be some provenance information that says (in provenance RDF form...):
> "This tool (yourprefix:Your_Tool_URI) matches this dataset (myprefix:My_Dataset_URI) because the dataset has DAP accessibility and has a latitude variable and has a longitude variable."
> 
> The user would then have some starting point for knowing how to use the tool with the dataset.
> 
> Cheers,
> -Eric
> 
> On Mar 1, 2012, at 3:09 PM, Lynnes, Christopher S. (GSFC-6102) wrote:
> 
>> Hey, Eric, thx for cleaning up the model!  When I get a free moment, I'll see if I can add some of our own instances to it.  Then I think it would be good to generate some sample SPARQL that satisfies the key requirements in our use case, i.e., for a given dataset, what tools can draw a map of it (and does it have to be accessed in a specific way for that to work)?
>> 
>> On Feb 29, 2012, at 1:03 AM, Eric Rozell wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Chris (and others),
>>> 
>>> I took a pass at the ontology.  Namely, I cleaned up some domain and range restrictions.  I also added some cool features of OWL 2 reasoning that should make this more "Semantic Webby".  I've documented this here: 
>>> http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/ToolMatch_Proposal_0.2
>>> 
>>> Hopefully the CMAP images help...
>>> 
>>> Moving forward on this, once we settle on a model, it would be great to start building a Web service where people can upload tools and datasets and identify new data attributes of relevance.  After upload transactions, the OWL 2 reasoner would reprocess the data, and data collection / tool compatibility can be queried from an additional Web service.
>>> 
>>> --Eric
>>> 
>>> On Feb 28, 2012, at 2:47 PM, Lynnes, Christopher S. (GSFC-6102) wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I know folks won't have time to examine before the telecon to look at it, but FWIW, here is my initial attempt in Turtle and RDF/XML.
>>>> 
>>>> http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/ToolMatch_Model
>>>> 
>>>> I'd like to use one of the upcoming Semantic Web telecons to go over the model if possible.
>>>> --
>>>> Dr. Christopher Lynnes     NASA/GSFC, Code 610.2    phone: 301-614-5185
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> esip-semanticweb mailing list
>>>> esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org
>>>> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-semanticweb
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Dr. Christopher Lynnes     NASA/GSFC, Code 610.2    phone: 301-614-5185
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

--
Dr. Christopher Lynnes     NASA/GSFC, Code 610.2    phone: 301-614-5185