-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add ingest for Bioportal prefixes #28
Conversation
caufieldjh
commented
Oct 26, 2022
•
edited
Loading
edited
- Ingest (including non-canonical prefixes)
- Curated yaml (including non-canonical prefixes)
- Tests
@@ -24,7 +24,16 @@ | |||
location: http://prefix.cc/context.jsonld | |||
comments: | |||
- prefix.cc is quite a messy source, it has many outdated expansions for OBO ontologies, lots of strange duplicates etc | |||
- we recommend this is not used in isolatiom but is instead combined, lower in the priority order | |||
- we recommend this is not used in isolation but is instead combined, lower in the priority order | |||
semantic: true |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what makes a context semantic or not?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've been taking this to mean that the named resources already contains semantic maps without requiring further processing, but perhaps that isn't @cmungall 's intent
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I mean, these are all semantic prefix maps, aren't they?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if it generates a namespace used as a resource in an RDF triple
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think that makes sense, but how does this annotation apply at a context level?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
hmm, everything in this repo should be geared towards semantic namespaces.. also this doesn't conform to https://github.com/linkml/prefixmaps/blob/main/src/prefixmaps/datamodel/context.py
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm puzzled as to how the semantic
slot got there to begin with if it isn't in the data model. Going to remove it.
@@ -0,0 +1,509 @@ | |||
name: bioportal | |||
prefixes: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
would be cool if we could converge on the "extended prefix map" schema
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would be nice, yes - but for now, this is still parsed to canonical/prefix_alias/namespace_alias so I'll save adopting the extended schema for a near-future PR
Co-authored-by: Charles Tapley Hoyt <cthoyt@gmail.com>