- From: Justin Clark-Casey <jc955@cam.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 14:47:42 +0000
- To: public-bioschemas@w3.org
On 02/02/18 15:56, LJ Garcia Castro wrote: > Hello Sarala, all, > > I am going through our UniProt examples and I did not find a way to say that UniProt is mainly about a BioChemEntity profiled as Protein but also includes > mentions of a BioChemEntity profiled as Gene. > > We have the keywords, and there in plain text I can have something like "protein, protein annotation" and so on. > > Now, thinking about crawling and so, if we do not clearly state what is the kind of BioChemEntity a resource is supporting, how are we going to get all > resources providing Protein or Sample? This applies for both DataCatalog and Dataset. > > In Record, not the type but the profile, we recommend using mainEntity as the way to link to the BioChemEntity. We could use mainEntity to specify the type of > the main entity supported by a resource or we could suggest a new property mainEntityType. We still would have to find a way to list the secondary entities (if > we see that is useful/desirable as well). For crawling, I think it would be useful to have the DataCatalog/Dataset indicate the BioChemEntity types that it indexes with mainEntity.additionalType or similar. If this info is present then it will be easier for a search engine to present relevant datasets to a user. The fallback is to work it out from all the BioChemEntity but this requires a full crawl. On another note, is there an up to date graph showing BioChemEntity and its properties? The older one for PhysicalEntity was very useful to me. Also, is there a final document/set of examples showing how to use the ontology extension mechanism for specifying BioChemEntity properties instead of the previous additionalProperty approach? Regards, -- Justin Clark-Casey Research Software Engineer, InterMine life sciences data integration, U of Cambridge http://twitter.com/justincc http://justincc.org
Received on Monday, 5 February 2018 14:48:09 UTC