[protege-discussion] Protege as core to a software development environment

[Csongor Nyulas]

Hi Ron, and all,

I would suggest you to look at the papers that came out from the NCBO 
BioPortal project:
http://bmir.stanford.edu/publications/project.php/ncbo

As well as other (more recent) paper's from the authors:
http://bmir.stanford.edu/publications/by_author.php/csongor_i_nyulas
http://bmir.stanford.edu/publications/by_author.php/natasha_f_noy
http://bmir.stanford.edu/publications/by_author.php/michael_v_dorf

Here are just a couple of the papers that could be of more interest:
http://bmir.stanford.edu/publications/view.php/semantic_infrastructure_to_enable_collaboration_in_ontology_development
http://bmir.stanford.edu/publications/view.php/bioportal_enhanced_functionality_via_new_web_services_from_the_national_center_for_biomedical_ontology_to_access_and_use_ontologies_in_software_applications

The statement in the abstract that you have cited has definitely kept 
its validity. After more than 2 years, the metadata infrastructure of 
the BioPortal is still maintained as an ontology, which described in the 
paper (and which, in the meantime, has evolved of course), and this had 
provided us with great flexibility and opportunities in extending the 
functionality and the services provided by the platform. We are using 
ontologies also to define the structure of the *notes and mappings in 
BioPortal*, which offered us the same great flexibility and 
opportunities to evolve.

I hope this helps,
Csongor

On 11/16/2011 6:53 AM, Ron Schultz wrote:
> A while ago I read the Protege Team article Ontology-Driven 
> Software:What We Learned From Using Ontologies As Infrastructure For 
> Software. I was wondering if there were any follow-on articles, 
> presentations, or conference proceedings further detailing this approach.
>
> I am particularly intrigued in the assertion in the abstract that "we 
> show that it is feasible to describe the structure of the data that 
> drives an application using anthologies rather than database schemas, 
> which are used traditionally to store the infrastructure data. We also 
> show that such an approach provides critical advantages in terms of 
> flexibility and adaptability of the tool itself. We demonstrate the 
> extensibility of the approach by enabling representation of views on 
> ontology's and their corresponding metadata in the same framework."
>
>
> -- 
> Ron
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> protege-discussion mailing list
> protege-discussion at lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-discussion
>
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-discussion/attachments/20111117/09c676de/attachment.html>