-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
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
added new object property has roost for issue #453 #672
Conversation
AnnotationAssertion(dce:creator obo:RO_0008509 <http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2908-3327>) | ||
AnnotationAssertion(dce:date obo:RO_0008509 "2023-01-18T14:28:21Z"^^xsd:dateTime) | ||
AnnotationAssertion(oboInOwl:inSubset obo:RO_0008509 subsets:ro-eco) | ||
AnnotationAssertion(rdfs:comment obo:RO_0008509 "A population of xs will possess adaptations (either evolved naturally or via artifical selection) which permit it to rest in y.") |
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.
can you please give a concrete example with terms in existing OBO ontologies as subject/predicate annotated with IAO:0000112 (example of usage)
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.
@cthoyt Do you mean just an example of how the term is used? E.g., "bird has roost some nest"
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.
yeah, that would be great, as long as it gives explicit references to Bird and Nest using OBO PURLs
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 don't think examples of usage have to use obo purls. Free text is fine. The purpose of "example of usage" is to provide extra context to disambiguate the term.
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 am just hoping there is a realistic, demonstrable scenario in which this relation will get used... like if there are no IRIs corresponding to entities that would actually use this, then how can we be sure this will be a useful relation? This is for the benefit of future users, who without a concrete example might not be able to figure out how to use the relationship
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.
This is for the benefit of future users, who without a concrete example might not be able to figure out how to use the relationship
I agree. That is the purpose of the annotation. We haven't required that OBO PURLs be used. See examples for example of usage
in adjacent to, capable of, characteristic of, and many more ...
But @diatomsRcool if you can provide an example OBO PURLs, that would be nice.
@diatomsRcool I added I also change the |
I'm not sure if we have a concrete choice on which predicate should be used, other than it should be DCTERMS and not DCE. Contributor is probably fine! |
Thanks @cthoyt |
@cthoyt @diatomsRcool I think this is ready to merge. Please let me know if you disagree. |
sorry I don't want to hold this up, but there was never any engagement with my request to get a concrete example. Can someone please suggest an actual example? Like "this kind of bird has roost on this kind of tree"? @diatomsRcool do you understand what I am asking? I just want an actual example of a bird and a tree. |
Flying foxes (Pteropus giganteus) roost in a banyan tree (Ficus benghalensis). Is that what you need? |
@diatomsRcool yes, that's perfect! You can annotate that on to the property with http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/IAO_0000112 (example of usage) |
@diatomsRcool I will merge after you provide the example of usage. |
Import(<http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ro/imports/uberon_import.owl>) | ||
Import(<http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ro/imports/obi_import.owl>) | ||
Annotation(dc:description "The OBO Relations Ontology (RO) is a collection of OWL relations (ObjectProperties) intended for use across a wide variety of biological ontologies."@en) | ||
Import(<http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ro/annotations.owl>) |
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.
It would be important to resolve all of these spurious changes before finishing the PR
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'll update the branch from master.
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 have no idea why that happened
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.
This branch started before we changed the repository to use the ODK structure.
@cthoyt Yes ... I did :( |
Fix two annotations that were broken as part of #672: a removed label and an exact synonym that had been changed into another annotation.
Somehow in #672, some "created_by" annotations were reverted to their "pre-ORCID" values, so we fix them again.
* change dc:creator to dcterms:contributor * change orcid to https * change orcid to https for has phenotype or disease * change annotation to dcterms:creator for nominally disjoint with * change dc:creator to dcterms:creator for is antagonist of * change dc:contributor to dcterms:contributor for has characterizing marker set * change dc:creator to dcterms:creator for is inverse agonist of * change dc:contributor to dcterms:contributor for has disease * change dc:contributor to dcterms:contributor for has phenotype or disease * change dc:creator to dcterms:creator for is agonist of * change dc:date to dcterms:date for has phenotype or disease * change dc:date to dcterms:date for has exposure medium * change dc:date to dcterms:date for has roost * change dc:title to dcterms:title * change dc:description to dcterm:description for ontology * add xsd:dateTime datatype to dcterms:date * Fix broken annotations. Fix two annotations that were broken as part of #672: a removed label and an exact synonym that had been changed into another annotation. * Fix "created_by" annotations. Somehow in #672, some "created_by" annotations were reverted to their "pre-ORCID" values, so we fix them again. --------- Co-authored-by: Damien Goutte-Gattat <dpg44@cam.ac.uk>
Added new object property "has roost" as child of "has habitat" to address issue #453