biomoby rifraf

At some point in the next few weeks we will be building/using a customized ED web page to conduct an experimental annotation jamboree on the biomoby web services.  We will be both measuring the differences in collected data between normal social tagging and semantic social tagging and providing a new layer of annotation for the biomoby framework.

The soon-to-be-created biomoby service annotation web page is an example of one application of the ED code (now available on Google code).   We hope that others will find many more uses for it over time.  When its ready, the little web page that could will

1. Request a JSON representation of the RDF describing a biomoby web service from a new SPARQL endpoint containing the BioMoby service graph.  See here for an RDF/XML rendition of such a service description.
2. Display the available information about the service in a reasonably intuitive and beautiful fashion.
3. Allow the user to tag the service with either semantic tags (e.g. from the service ontology or elsewhere) or free text tags.
4. Send the tagging information to the ED RDF repository.

The question of what exactly to collect and why is still a little vague however.  Why and how would tags, semantic or otherwise, be useful in the biomoby system?

Moby2.0 developer Luke McCarthy requested that the service tags focus on defining what might be reasonable semantic relationships (predicates) between the input and the output of the service.  An example might be for a a basic blast service, service input a) 'is homologous to' service output b).  

Any other suggestions regarding service semantics of interest warmly requested and appreciated.

-BG