24
Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F Representing URI Resolution in OWL Alan Ruttenberg (responsible for errors) Matthias Samwald Jonathan Rees

Representing URI Resolution in OWL

  • Upload
    espen

  • View
    18

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Representing URI Resolution in OWL. Alan Ruttenberg (responsible for errors) Matthias Samwald Jonathan Rees. What goes wrong with URLs. The server disappears (s) The content disappears - 404 (c) The content might change and you want to know and communicate what it used to be (d) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg (responsible for errors)

Matthias Samwald

Jonathan Rees

Page 2: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

What goes wrong with URLs• The server disappears (s)• The content disappears - 404 (c)• The content might change and you want to know and

communicate what it used to be (d)• Access to the content is too slow (s)• Access to the content is too public (p)• The content is very big (b)• You don't know if a URI is an information resource or

not (w)• You want to record and access metadata -

information about some information resource - and you don't know where to get it. (m)

• You don't know what format an information resource is encoded in. (f)

Page 3: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

Existing proposals: LSIDs

• Authority • “Location independence”• Data/Metadata distinction• Access method independence• Versioning

• (similar: ARK, purl, DOI…)

Page 4: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

Existing proposals: http-range14

• Use http. • Use result code to recognize potential non-

information resources• Result code 2xx = information resource• Result code 3xx = any resource, pointer to

more information• Result code 4xx unknown type • “303” to get more information about the thing

Page 5: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

Existing proposals: Content negotiation

• Agent asks for resource

• Server responds with list of content types and where to get each

• Agent chooses which to retrieve

Page 6: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

“Short statements”

John Barkley

1. Identify MIME Types of URIs.

2. Identify versions of URIs

3. URIs should dereference to something, even if it is only documentation,e.g., rdfs:comment

4. Use LSIDs

Page 7: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

“Short statements”

Phil Lord

1. URIs should identify one thing only.

2. URI allocation schemes should encourage stability over time.

3. Resources identified by URIs should be checksummable.

Page 8: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

“Short statements”

Matthias Samwald1. Be careful what you are talking about

- use separate names2. Distinguish information resource from

non-information resource3. Distinguish making a query from

resolution

Page 9: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

“Short statements”

David Booth (Information resources/metadata)

1. http://example.org/foo#bar might identify a thing(non-information resource), http://example.org/foo can be used to seek metadata about it.

2. Dereferencing non-information resources yields a http 303 result code

Page 10: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

Selected issues with proposed solutions

• http-range14 - “late” don’t know anything until you do the retrieval

• Content negotion - confusion over what the thing is - e.g. foaf human readable document, rdf at same address. Try talking about the ugly font.

• LSID - requires server deployment. Based on web services (slow). Unclear semantics of “versions”, “metadata”, “data”

• No single proposal deals with all issues

Page 11: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

An Alternative

• Use the our SW tools to help solve this problem

• Represent the information that you want to know about URIs in OWL.

• Build an ontology to represent consensus/schema.

• Take advantage of consistency checking, inheritence

Page 12: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

Goals

• Transparent/explicit. Contract based.

• Adjustable

• Extendable

• Ontologically sound

Page 13: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

Different things• The temperature of a patient (not an

information resource)• A instrument that measures and reports

temperature (not an information resource)• The record retrieved when you query the

instrument (an information resource)• The record that you retrieved at a certain time

and you copied and saved (an information resource)

but related

Page 14: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

A sketch

• Some useful distinctions

• Top level classes

• Some properties

• Only about instances (not properties or classes)

Page 15: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

InformationResource NotAnInformationResource

• Information resources are conceptually “Gettable”

• They might not be able to be retrieved at a particular time

• They might change• Ask yourself: “Would it be possible to

get the thing itself over a network”• Disjoint

Page 16: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

UnchangingInformationResourceEvolveableInformationResource

• UnchangingInformationResource is like LSID “data”. A promise is made that the content will never change.

• EvolveableInformationResource are resources that might change (even if we don’t want them to, e.g. NCBI gene records)

• Disjoint

Page 17: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

RetrievalMethod• A way to get an information resource.• Some examples

– StandardURIRetrieval– TransformUriRetrieval

http://genesdbs.org/entrez/7157 => http://cache.ibm.com/?generetrieve&id=http://genesdbs.org/entrez/

– SPARQLMethod => http://genesdbs.org/entrez/7157 =>

select ?dataFROM http://sparql.ibm.com/lifesciWHERE{ http://genesdbs.org/entrez/7157 :data ?data }

– WebServiceMethodSupply a WSDL, name of parameter

Page 18: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

RetrievalMethod (notes)

• There may be more than one.• When more than one try them all in

random order, or explicitly represent preference.

• For company specific retrieval, add another RetrievalMerthod to an appropriate upper class (one more triple)

Page 19: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

InformationResourceFormat• Explicitly give enough information to know what you

will have to parse should you retrieve the resource (so you can choose whether or not to retrieve)

• Like mime/type - BUT only the format, not the type (that’s for defining by class)– RDFXML– RDFTurtle– JPEG– TIFF– HTML– …

Note: Different formats of “same” digital thing should be given different names. (but they may be related by some property, e.g. hasOtherRepresentation)

Page 20: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

Some classes of InformationResource

• XrayImage• Triples (rdf statements)• MedicalRecord• VersionInformation• ProtocolDocumentation• ProvenanceDescription• SPARQLEndpoint• ….• (ask me about metadata!)

Page 21: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

Properties

• Relate a NotInformationResource to an InformationResource - seeAlso, subjectOfMedicalRecord, foaf:homepage, biozen:d-data (‘described by data’)

Page 22: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

Properties

• Relating an informationResource to “metadata”

• previousVersion (UnchangingInformationResource)

• hasVersionDescription• hasChangeDescription• generatedBy (not an information resource)• cachedDate • hasMD5 (UnchangingInformationResource)

Page 23: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

An exampleClass PartnersDigitalXray subclassOf NeverChangingInformationResource subclassOf DigitalXray mediaType hasValue jpegType retrievalmethod: hasValue webServiceMethod1002

http://partners.org/radiology/817277366 rdf:type PartnersDigitalXray

mediaType jpegType (inherited) retrievalmethod webServiceMethod1002 (inherited)

Page 24: Representing URI Resolution in OWL

Alan Ruttenberg, Oct 3, 2006 HCLS F2F

Sharing bare URIs

• Don’t, unless you have to. Generally messages should be a set of triples giving adequate information about type, resolution

• If you do, use existing best practices to make them last, e.g. PURL