[MOBY-dev] MOBY II (Was: fixes in Moses)

[Mark Wilkinson]

Absolutely - it isn't going to change in a hurry, and it isn't going to  
change without good reason!

There are still many things that can be done with MOBY to use/improve it  
under the current architecture;  however, the "research" potential of the  
MOBY architecture is largely spent - it's now more a (well funded!)  
technical excercise of tweaking and adding improvements here and there.   
There is research potential in the automated selection of services, and  
the automated integration of the resulting data, and I have grant  
applications in within those domains, but MOBY *architecture* per se is no  
longer a "research theme" of my group;  Since I am obligated to a research  
programme out of my lab, we're starting to "play" with RDF representations  
of MOBY data here just to see how much (if any) advantage it gives us, and  
whether OWL versions of the MOBY ontologies help in the service  
discovery/data integration problem.

So... don't worry, I'm not suggesting that we break anything! :-)

M



On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 02:29:38 -0800, Martin Senger <senger at ebi.ac.uk> wrote:

>> I am *so* looking forward to 'Moby II' where we model things in RDF  
>> rather
>> than XML
>>
>    To be honest I am rather affraid of that. We all invested time and
> efforts into making biomoby working. If we are going to change all API  
> and
> the way how it works we will need to invest gain. Change is not bad, but
> must be discussed and must have a merit, not just that RDF is more
> fancy. I hope that we are still on the same board...
>
>    Martin
>