The comment is now deleted, but someone asked for some examples on nanopublications. I just found out about nanopublications myself, but here is what I found:
- The website itself [1].
- This paper from 2018 has an example (and it shows some broader scientific context about this idea) [2].
I asked for examples in context. E.g., how might one use nanopublications to document an assertion on a webpage. The examples page on the website seems to be for someone already very familiar with Linked Data/semantic web/etc.
I deleted the comment because I thought I could figure it out on my own, but someone here could probably save me the time.
I tried to search through and figure it out before I posted the comment, figuring if I saw a few examples I'd get it, but I just got more confused. This sounds like a really interesting concept for building a essentially a human knowledge base with individual assertions built on eachother, maybe linked and networked with other assertions via the publications bit so you can start tracing where the knowledge came from/the background etc. But I couldn't figure out how it's supposed to do anything or how scientists are supposed to interact with the standard, and if I was even understanding the capabilities of this correctly. Is there a central repository for these, or a user interface to create/peer review/publish/read nanopublications? Who is supposed to implement the standard, who is supposed to use it, and how is it supposed to be used? I was hoping looking through examples would clear that up but I just ended up more confused and am hoping someone more knowledgeable can bail me out on that.
1. How might one use nanopublications to document an assertion on a webpage?
2. Are these meant to be parsed by human readers? Who are these for and what are people supposed to do with them?
The answer:
(1) there's no real difference in a nanopub that originates in a webpage or elsewhere. I think the best to do here is to document the origin of assertions in the provenance graph (through e.g. prov:wasDerivedFrom or prov:used predicates that have URL/webpage entities has objects).
(2) That's a very open question, but I'd say they're mostly for machine use; you can get a nice overview at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1809.06532.pdf
I'm a bit confused by the example nanopublications - they just look like a bunch of code[1] - are these meant to be parsed by human readers? Who are these for and what are people supposed to do with them?
7 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 26.7 ms ] thread- The website itself [1].
- This paper from 2018 has an example (and it shows some broader scientific context about this idea) [2].
[1] http://nanopub.org/wordpress/?page_id=8
[2] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1809.06532.pdf
I deleted the comment because I thought I could figure it out on my own, but someone here could probably save me the time.
This comment is on the same point: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23899048
1. How might one use nanopublications to document an assertion on a webpage?
2. Are these meant to be parsed by human readers? Who are these for and what are people supposed to do with them?
The answer:
(1) there's no real difference in a nanopub that originates in a webpage or elsewhere. I think the best to do here is to document the origin of assertions in the provenance graph (through e.g. prov:wasDerivedFrom or prov:used predicates that have URL/webpage entities has objects).
(2) That's a very open question, but I'd say they're mostly for machine use; you can get a nice overview at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1809.06532.pdf
[1] example: http://server.nanopubs.lod.labs.vu.nl/RAqknxBp9YPV_hY5nMa2yN...