Mind maps just begging for RDF triples and formal models by Kerstin Forsberg.
From the post:
Earlier this week CDISC English Speaking User Group (ESUG) Committee arranged a webinar: “CDISC SHARE – How SHARE is developing as a project/standard” with Simon Bishop, Standards and Operations Director, GSK. I did find the comprehensive presentation from Simon, and his colleuage Diana Wold, very interesting.
Interesting as the presentation in an excellent way exemplifies how “Current standards (company standards, SDTM standards, other standards) do not current deliver the capability we require” Also, I do find the presentation interesting as it exemplifies mind maps as a way forward as “Diagrams help us understand clinical processes and how this translates into datasets and variables.” (Quotes from slide 20 in the presentation: Conclusions.)
Below a couple of examples of mind maps from the presentation. And also, the background to my thinking that they are Mind maps just begging for RDF triples and formal models of the clinical and biomedical reality to make them fully ready “both for human understanding and for computer interpretation“.
Interesting post but the:
both for human understanding and for computer interpretation
is what caught my attention.
Always a good thing to improve the ability of computer’s to find things for us. To the extent RDF can do that, great!
But human understanding is far deeper and more complex than any computer, by RDF or other means, can achieve.
I think we need to keep the distinction between human understanding and computer interpretation firmly in mind.
I first saw this at the SemanticWeb.com.