Using Semantic Programming for Developing a Web Content Management System for Semantic Phenotype Data

We present a prototype of a semantic version of Morph·D·Base that is currently in development. It is based on SOCCOMAS, a semantic web content management system that is controlled by a set of source code ontologies together with a Java-based middleware and our Semantic Programming Ontology (SPrO). The middleware interprets the descriptions contained in the source code ontologies and dynamically decodes and executes them to produce the prototype. The Morph·D·Base prototype in turn allows the generation of instance-based semantic morphological descriptions through completing input forms. User input to these forms generates data in form of semantic graphs. We show with examples how the prototype has been described in the source code ontologies using SPrO and demonstrate live how the middleware interprets these descriptions and dynamically produces the application.

[1]  Lars Vogt,et al.  Towards a semantic approach to numerical tree inference in phylogenetics , 2018, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.

[2]  Xiaoshu Wang,et al.  From XML to RDF: how semantic web technologies will change the design of 'omic' standards , 2005, Nature Biotechnology.

[3]  István Mikó,et al.  Phenotypes in Insect Biodiversity Research , 2018 .

[4]  R. Jenner,et al.  The need for data standards in zoomorphology , 2013, Journal of morphology.

[5]  Lars Vogt.  Assessing similarity: on homology, characters and the need for a semantic approach to non‐evolutionary comparative homology , 2017, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.

[6]  Michael Uschold,et al.  Ontologies: principles, methods and applications , 1996, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[7]  Mark A. Bedau,et al.  Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Computing and Information , 2003 .

[8]  Jason E. Stewart,et al.  Minimum information about a microarray experiment (MIAME)—toward standards for microarray data , 2001, Nature Genetics.

[9]  Lars Vogt,et al.  eScience and the need for data standards in the life sciences: in pursuit of objectivity rather than truth , 2013 .

[10]  Laura M. Jackson,et al.  Finding Our Way through Phenotypes , 2015, PLoS biology.

[11]  Azman Osman Lim,et al.  OAM: An Ontology Application Management Framework for Simplifying Ontology-Based Semantic Web Application Development , 2016, Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng..

[12]  E. Prud hommeaux,et al.  SPARQL query language for RDF , 2011 .

[13]  Martin Boeker,et al.  Strengths and limitations of formal ontologies in the biomedical domain. , 2009, Revista electronica de comunicacao, informacao & inovacao em saude : RECIIS.

[14]  Andrew R Jones,et al.  A strategy capitalizing on synergies: the Reporting Structure for Biological Investigation (RSBI) working group. , 2006, Omics : a journal of integrative biology.

[15]  Alvis Brazma,et al.  On the Importance of Standardisation in Life Sciences , 2001, Bioinform..

[16]  S Schulz,et al.  Formal Ontologies in Biomedical Knowledge Representation , 2013, Yearbook of Medical Informatics.

[17]  Peter Grobe,et al.  SOCCOMAS: A Self-Describing and Content-Independent Application for Semantic Ontology-Controlled Web-Content-Management-Systems , 2017 .

[18]  Erik Schultes,et al.  The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship , 2016, Scientific Data.

[19]  Lars Vogt,et al.  The future role of bio-ontologies for developing a general data standard in biology: chance and challenge for zoo-morphology , 2009, Zoomorphology.

[20]  Ken Wenzel.  KOMMA: An Application Framework for Ontology-based Software Systems , 2010 .

[21]  Lars Vogt,et al.  The linguistic problem of morphology: structure versus homology and the standardization of morphological data , 2009, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.