The Ontology Interest Group Calls take place at 10 AM US Eastern time / 16 CET (link to the meeting room).
The meetings are open, you are invited!
Notes
- Identifiers
- https://github.com/vivo-ontologies/vivo-ontology/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Aidentifiers - issues resulting from the ID survey have been created
- new documentation on "Identifiers in the VIVO Ontology" suggested by Christian Hauschke
- (by Argie Kasprzik) specifically about ranges: is the intent to enforce an ID format (ie.g., in order to enable validation routines)?
In practice it is often not realistic to impose that on users ... probably the same in the VIVO community?
In the DCMI community we have had an absolutely humongous discussion about this with many ramifications, see here plus branches and predecessor issues:
https://github.com/dcmi/usage/issues/43 – I hope you have access. The discussion continues to the present day, we have recently taken it up again.
- (by Argie Kasprzik) specifically about ranges: is the intent to enforce an ID format (ie.g., in order to enable validation routines)?
- Discussion: dcam:rangeIncludes (linked above) is an interesting idea for avoiding the reasoning implications of rdfs:range, but it's not clear that it would be useful for VIVO. In most cases the range of an identifier will simply be string but we don't necessarily want to make the ontology inconsistent if someone does something different. Might be better to leave out explicit range axioms and instead use one or more annotation properties (TBD) to describe intended values and/or validation (e.g. regex patterns) that software implementers may wish to employ when using the ontology in a specific application. Requires some further discussion with the broader ontology group.
- CERIF2VIVO Update
- Discussion: Brian will try to complete the 4th review columns; then we need to see where there is broad agreement between the reviews and implement any suggested changes. After that we need to assess whether the expressions contained in the tables are something that can be processed automatically in software or whether we need to formalize them further.
- Other ontologies in vivo-ontologies - how to deal with them? They are unsupported and not in a productive state, but useful resources.
- https://github.com/vivo-ontologies/language-ontology
- https://github.com/vivo-ontologies/academic-degree-ontology
- Good discussion of the academic degree ontology; may be something we want to move forward with. Current model is US-centric, but there could be swappable modules for different countries. Would be better to build those modules as this type of class hierarchy rather than using something like skos:ConceptScheme to group the current Concepts. Change to classes instead of individuals for the named degrees would have important software implementation implications, but there are other long-needed changes (e.g. deprecating the Person subtypes in favor of roles) that would also require software changes and we'll need to move those forward too.
- PRs and issues
- https://github.com/vivo-ontologies/vivo-ontology/pull/84 - Add Wikidata ID
- https://github.com/vivo-ontologies/vivo-ontology/pull/86 - Add GND ID
- https://github.com/vivo-ontologies/vivo-ontology/pull/46 - Adding maintainer relation
