[esip-semanticweb] Mapping between CLEAN and SWEET or GCMD

Mon Apr 1 17:12:24 EDT 2013

We're working on the mapping problem at the ASDC as well. We're 
developing a very robust, high-precision Earth Sciences ontology and 
will want to map it to vocabularies such as GCMD because, among other 
things, we hope the mappings will enable people to use our tools and our 
data using their own, familiar vocabulary, without having to become 
familiar with our particular vocabulary. My strategy, at this point, is 
to create an ontology of terms which will have classes such as 
"GCMDCategory", "GCMDTerm", with individual terms as instances.  The 
terms will denote objects and/or classes of objects that are represented 
in the ontology.  I've adopted this particular approach because it seems 
amenable to our objective of using an ontology to support better data 
discovery, data fusion, and data analytics and will allow us to map 
multiple vocabularies into a single ontology.

I'd be interested in comparing approaches in cases where others have 
done mappings.

Beth Huffer
Consultant, NASA LaRC
Atmospheric Science Data Center
720-235-2295 (cell)
443-438-5433 (office)

On 4/1/13 3:52 PM, Marshall X Ma wrote:
>
> We were working a bit on the mapping between two SKOS vocabularies, 
> namely CLEAN and GCMD, and we focused on the instance to instance mapping.
>
> Personally I was thinking to focus on the mapping between instances of 
> 'skos:Concept' and instances of subclasses of 'owl:Class', just do not 
> want to make myself confused between instance and class.
>
> Some resources w.r.t. this issue, perhaps you already have them.
>
> A document discussing OWL and SKOS: 
> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/skos-and-owl/master.html
>
> And there is a tool that can covert OWL ontologies to SKOS 
> vocabularies: http://owl.cs.manchester.ac.uk/owltoskos/
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Marshall
>
> *From:*Steve Richard [mailto:steve.richard at azgs.az.gov]
> *Sent:* Monday, April 01, 2013 00:09
> *To:* 'John Graybeal'
> *Cc:* 'Marshall X Ma'; esip-semanticweb at rtpnet.org
> *Subject:* RE: [esip-semanticweb] Mapping between CLEAN and SWEET or GCMD
>
> I haven't delved into the problem recently, but I think the current 
> trick is 'punning', in which an element it treated as either a class 
> or an instance depending on the context.
>
> steve
>
> Stephen M Richard
>
> Arizona Geological Survey
>
> 416 W. congress #100
>
> Tucson, AZ
>
> AZGS: 520-770-3500
>
> Office: 520-209-4127
>
> FAX: 520-770-3505
>
> *From:*John Graybeal [mailto:jgraybeal at ucsd.edu]
> *Sent:* Saturday, March 30, 2013 3:40 AM
> *To:* steve.richard at azgs.az.gov <mailto:steve.richard at azgs.az.gov>
> *Cc:* 'Marshall X Ma'; esip-semanticweb at rtpnet.org 
> <mailto:esip-semanticweb at rtpnet.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [esip-semanticweb] Mapping between CLEAN and SWEET or GCMD
>
> Marshall, Steve, all,
>
> Did you all ever come up with a best practice for bridging the 
> SKOS-OWL divide, as discussed below?  Back in the OWL 1.0 days I know 
> this was, like, unbridgeable, but with 2.0 I think the experts were 
> talking about creating a relation that appropriately related SKOS 
> terms to OWL concepts. But then I had to pay attention to other things....
>
> John
>
> On Nov 2, 2012, at 17:00, steve richard <steve.richard at azgs.az.gov 
> <mailto:steve.richard at azgs.az.gov>> wrote:
>
> The SKOS-OWL is particularly interesting to me (instance vs. class). 
> I've wrestled with this trying to figure out how to bind the CGI 
> GeoScience vocabularies (http://resource.geosciml.org/201202/) with 
> OWL (e.g. SimpleLithology2012 withCGI_Lithology.owl 
> <https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/subversion/CGI_CDTGVocabulary/trunk/OwlWork/CGI_Lithology.owl>).
>
> The issue emerges again in an ontology for geologic map unit 
> integration I've been working on. If you're at the Geological Society 
> of America Meeting in Charlotte next week, come and visit my poster
>
> Monday Nov 5, Charlotte Convention Center, Hall B, Poster Booth 
> Number: 186. "A GEOLOGIC UNIT SCHEME FOR REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP 
> INTEGRATION"
>
> steve
>
> *From:*esip-semanticweb-bounces at lists.esipfed.org 
> <mailto:esip-semanticweb-bounces at lists.esipfed.org>[mailto:esip-semanticweb-bounces at lists.esipfed.org 
> <mailto:semanticweb-bounces at lists.esipfed.org>]*On Behalf Of*Marshall X Ma
> *Sent:*Thursday, November 01, 2012 4:30 PM
> *To:*esip-semanticweb at rtpnet.org <mailto:esip-semanticweb at rtpnet.org>
> *Subject:*[esip-semanticweb] Mapping between CLEAN and SWEET or GCMD
>
> We want to test the mapping between non-specialist vocabularies and 
> specialist vocabularies. A good example can be the mapping between 
> CLEAN vocabulary and SWEET ontology or GCMD keywords.
>
> Anyone has done/thought this work before or, any ideas on the 
> following questions? Thanks.
>
> * CLEAN is a non-specialist vocabulary for climate and energy
>
> ** ref:http://cleanet.org/clean/about/climate_energy_.html
>
> ** A SKOS encoding of CLEAN vocabulary seralized in turtle 
> format:https://scm.escience.rpi.edu/svn/public/projects/gcis/branches/initial_rdf/skos/clean.ttl
>
> * [Question 1 ] Mapping between CLEAN vocabulary and SWEET?
>
> ** We have experience on mapping between two skos vocabularies: using 
> skos:broadMatch, skos:narrowMatch, etc.
>
> ** SWEET is in OWL encoding
>
> *** Comparison between a skos concept and an owl class
>
> *** Anyone has experience on mapping between skos and owl?
>
> * [Question 2] Or, we can try to map between CLEAN vocabulary and GCMD 
> keywords?
>
> ** GCMD keywords has its version 7.0 in SKOS 
> encoding:http://gcmd.gsfc.nasa.gov/Connect/docs/kms/KeywordManagementServiceAPI.pdf
>
> -- Marshall
>
> **
>
> *Xiaogang (Marshall) Ma*
>
> Postdoctoral Research Associate
>
> Tetherless World Constellation
>
> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
>
> 110 8th Street, Troy, NY 12180, USA
>
> E-mail:max7 at rpi.edu <mailto:max7 at rpi.edu>
>
> Homepage:https://sites.google.com/site/xgmaitc
>
> _______________________________________________
> esip-semanticweb mailing list
> esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org 
> <mailto:esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org>
> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-semanticweb
>
>
> ----------------
>
> John Graybeal    <mailto:jgraybeal at ucsd.edu>     phone: 858-534-2162
>
> Product Manager
>
> Ocean Observatories Initiative Cyberinfrastructure Project: 
> http://ci.oceanobservatories.org
>
> Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: http://marinemetadata.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> esip-semanticweb mailing list
> esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org
> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-semanticweb

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-semanticweb/attachments/20130401/088f0110/attachment-0001.html>