Re: [Egadss-devel] Re: [Gnumed-devel] incompatibility between glif and gnumed ?

[Syan Tan]

then it is a teaching tool only ?  Darn. It does have a fairly easy-to-use forms gui, ( although I think something about 75%

of computer science students would attempt this during their course,

e.g. the block form generated from attributes , but it allows the option of
inserting a form within a form ) , and it can be backended by a relational database, so why not up its query facility,

(just translate paths to the class and slot id and link together with a lot of ands to create a sql select statement ;

of course would only work if  the backend was mandatory relational ).

The instance display substitution is a good idea as well.

The scalability of search in relational databases is provided by indexes and automatic query optimizing, I gather.

Are you sure Protege couldn't be used for application building with a little modification ? 

On Sun Jan 8 9:13 , Tim Churches sent:

> Syan Tan wrote:
> > at the moment, playing with the protege gui,  searching is still pretty crap 
> > (only exact match instances of a class,
> > 
> > not search on  say  a path e.g.  identity.dob.year >= 1950  and 
> > identity.dob.year <=1960 and identity.sex = Male
>
> Syan,
>
> Protege is intended as a tool to develop an ontology, not to provide
> practical implementations of it. The ability to create instances of
> classes is there only to make it easier to "field test" the ontology
> against real-life examples of instances of classes and subclasses
> easier, not as a place to actually store lots of class instances in a
> production setting. Hence teh rudimentary search facilties etc.
>
> Tim C
>
> > *On Sun Jan 8 4:59 , Syan Tan sent:
> > 
> > *
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >     thanks for that. How about another question? Is Protege scalable ?
> > 
> >     Can you build an EMR using Protege types ?
> > 
> >     Where is there open source scalable ontology software ?
> > 
> >     *On Sat Jan 7 10:22 , Glen McCallum sent:
> > 
> >     *
> > 
> >         Problems that EGADSS encountered with GLIF:
> > 
> >         1) Licensing. When we looked at GLIF, there was no license. It was
> >         communicated to us that they intended the GLIF specification to be
> >         "open," hence they attached no license or copyright to the
> >         specification. It's not quite that easy so our manager spoke to them
> >         about public domain and open source documentation licenses. I'm not
> >         sure if they took action based on that talk or if they left the
> >         specification the way it was.
> > 
> >         2) Completeness. GLIF is not a complete or implementable
> >         specification. It's a conceptual specification, which looks really
> >         nice with all the UML diagrams, etc, etc. But when you get down to
> >         the nitty gritty, there's little a low-level implementor can take and
> >         work with. You can only model guidelines on a conceptual level. In
> >         order to implement a GLIF engine, you would first have to write
> >         formal syntax and semantics for the language (no small task). Make
> >         no mistake, this is a show stopper.
> > 
> >         3) Standards. GLIF is not a standard. Using standards is a high
> >         priority for egadss. In my opinion, the likelihood of GLIF becoming a
> >         standard in the near future, in light of (2), is not very good.
> > 
> >         Thanks for including us in this thread. I hope this is helpful.
> > 
> >         Best Regards,
> >         ~Glen McCallum
> >         Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
> > 
> > 
> >         On 7-Jan-06, at 8:41 AM, J Busser wrote:
> > 
> >          > The following had been posted on the egadds list a little over a
> >          > year ago (http://egadss.org/\).
> >         http://egadss.org/%29.> I am not sure if they anticipate
> >          > interoperability with GLIF.
> >          >
> >          >> ... we could have licensing issues with GLIF. ...McGill University
> >          >> is involved in GLIF and they are known not to favor open source
> >          >> though I do not know about open content. The issue presented...
> >          >> is not a GLIF or a GEL(LO) problem. It is a Protege issue data
> >          >> storage and export issue. Can this be addressed by a modification
> >          >> to the plug-in?
> >          >
> >          >
> >          > At 7:07 AM +0800 1/7/06, Syan Tan wrote:
> >          >> Is there an incompatibility between glif and gnumed ? I downloaded
> >          >> a specification for glif (guideline interchange format) , and I
> >          >> was wondering if gnumed could have an implementaion , e.g. with a
> >          >> glif editor, and possibly a glif viewer. Later could be
> >          >> incorporated as a glif popup , if coding systems firms up.
> >          >
> >          >
> >          >
> >          > -------------------------------------------------------
> >          > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through
> >          > log files
> >          > for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
> >          > searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD
> >          > SPLUNK!
> >          > http://ads.osdn.com/\?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
> >         http://ads.osdn.com/%3Fad_id%3D7637%26alloc_id%3D16865%26op%3Dclick>
> >          > _______________________________________________
> >          > Egadss-devel mailing list
> >          > address@hidden
> >         address@hidden%27,%27%27,%27%27,%27%27%29>
> >          > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egadss-devel
> >         https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egadss-devel>
> > 
> >      
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gnumed-devel mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnumed-devel