- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 16:26:47 +0000
- To: public-bioschemas@w3.org
Received on Friday, 19 January 2018 16:27:10 UTC
Has anyone done (or would be interested to do) a compare/contrast of SPOKE (previously HetioNet) and the bioschemas designs? To give a rough idea, it seems to have types for: Gene, Disease, Pathway, PharmacologicClass, CellularComponent, Compound, Anatomy, Symptom, BiologicalProcess, MolecularFunction, SideEffect. https://neo4j.het.io/browser/ is a neo4j-powered browser (try "CALL db.schema()"), and https://elifesciences.org/articles/26726 a summary, with the schema in this section: https://elifesciences.org/articles/26726#s4 Does it seem reasonable that this level of detail might be mixed directly in alongside schema.org+bioschemas markup along the lines recently discussed from blue brain e.g. https://github.com/BlueBrain/nexus-bbp-domains/blob/master/modules/bbp-experiment/src/main/resources/schemas/bbp/experiment/subject/v0.1.0.json ? cheers, Dan
Received on Friday, 19 January 2018 16:27:10 UTC