Agenda & Notes

• Pure now has a SPARQL API that is compliant to the VIVO Ontology 1.6: https://helpcenter.pure.elsevier.com/en_US/release-notes-pure-520-4210/release-notes-pure-520-4210
  • "Support for VIVO has been added to Pure as part of the Administrative module. When enabled this will provide you with a VIVO 1.6 compliant SPARQL endpoint to query as well as a test page in the Pure Experts Portal"
• Review of pull requests:
  • https://github.com/vivo-ontologies/vivo-ontology/pull/1 - Added rdfs:comment for bibo:issue
    
  • https://github.com/vivo-ontologies/vivo-ontology/pull/9 - Link to VIVO development process wiki page from readme
  • https://github.com/vivo-ontologies/vivo-ontology/pull/11 - Add pull request template to vivo-ontology repository
  • https://github.com/vivo-ontologies/vivo-ontology/pull/13 - Update new feature request issue template
  • https://github.com/vivo-ontologies/vivo-ontology/pull/16 - Added licence to vivo.owl
  • Feedback from Melanie: Review process is straightforward. 
• Ontology release management
  • no update
• Open Access Ontology
  • https://github.com/tawahle/oa-ontology 
  • In Germany, all institutions from the Leibniz Association must submit an annual report on publications published in Open Access and its subtypes; ther German institutions needs the information about Open Access publications for variuos reports too - a need to cover this informatioin in VIVO.
  • OA types align to the Unpaywall oa_status (Data Format | Unpaywall)
  • Questions - could be there any implications because of:
    • access types assigned additionally to skos:Concept
      • Is OA a quality of a work? We should look into modeling the oa status as classes. 
    • vivo-oa:Open_Access_General has additionally skos:broader relation to vivo-oa:Open_Access_Diamond, vivo-oa:Open_Access_Green, vivo-oa:Open_Access_Gold, vivo-oa:Open_Access_Bronze, vivo-oa:Open_Access_Hybrid ?
    • For now there are links to Open Access in Wikidata, Agrovoc and COAR (Controlled Vocabularies for Repositories: open access (coar-repositories.org)) via rdfs:seeAlso. Does it make sense to make the links via owl:sameAs?
    • What is missing in the ontology?
• bibo:doi
  • domain in VIVO - obo:IAO_0000030
  • domain in https://github.com/structureddynamics/Bibliographic-Ontology-BIBO/blob/master/bibo.owl -

    <owl:unionOf rdf:parseType="Collection">
    
                        <rdf:Description rdf:about="&bibo;Collection"/>
    
                        <rdf:Description rdf:about="&bibo;Document"/>
    
    </owl:unionOf>

  • range of objects that can have a DOI has dramatically increased.
    • Suggestions: DOI as an identifier in the VIVO ontology or drop the axioms/restrictions from bibo:doi.
    • First step is to remove the domain to make the DOI available for all types of things. Issue needs to be created. 

Ideas for future meetings

• Improvement of VIVO sample data

To Do

• Enter tasks here, use "@" to assign a user, and "//", to add a deadline.