- From: LJ Garcia Castro <ljgarcia@ebi.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 09:36:58 +0000
- To: Justin Clark-Casey <justinccdev@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-bioschemas@w3.org
- Message-ID: <eaf6aa86-8047-04cb-a62f-590cb98dbe9e@ebi.ac.uk>
Hi Justin, It was just a glitch (either on the site or my eyes, hard to tell now). Contributors are now on a separated tab. I am not sure though whether examples or ontologies will be attached to this type. I know Keneth and Ricardo were working on some examples but as this is a wrapper for specialized profiles, well, not sure how to proceed. I am happy to provide examples as we point to genes and organisms for which there is no specific profile. I will talk about it with Ricardo, Keneth and Alasdair and will keep the list posted on any advance. Regards, On 13/03/2018 18:38, Justin Clark-Casey wrote: > Could Keneth or Ricardo comment on this? I think that BioChemEntity > is a very important schema, as it's the one that allows a description > of actual scientific entities, yet afaik there is > * no clear example of usage > * no documentation of how other ontologies terms would be used within it > * or any actual use in the wild, as of yet. > > -- > Justin Clark-Casey (http://justincc.org) > RSE, Intermine, University of Cambridge > ELIXIR UK node technical co-ordinator > > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 1:16 AM, ljgarcia <ljgarcia@ebi.ac.uk > <mailto:ljgarcia@ebi.ac.uk>> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I just realized no one seems to be involved in the BioChemEntity > specification, see > http://bioschemas.org/types/BioChemEntity/specification/ > <http://bioschemas.org/types/BioChemEntity/specification/> > > BioChemEntity was the agreed named for PhysicalEntity during the > last meeting in October. PhysicalEntity and DataRecord were > defined during the BioHackathon mainly between Michel Dumontier > and myself, with collaboration from Olga Giraldo and Alexander > Garcia as well, taking into account previous versions/alternatives > of it. Both of them were presented in October when all attendees > discussed names, properties ans so on. PhysicalEntity came from > BiologicalEntity which I defined as part of the work done for the > Protein specification (that later evolved into a profile). The > BiologicalEntity was presented during the second meeting and > people liked it so it was adopted as a "metatype". It has been an > effort where multiple people have participated. > > Giving the history behind BioChemEntity, I am not sure v.0.1 is > accurate. For DataRecord v.0.1 seems right. > > And, there is no profile for it. There is probably no mandatory > fields but we still have recommendations regarding how to use > mainEntityOfPage/mainEntity in order to link to a DataRecord or > url in order to link to the official web page for this entity. > > I also think isContainedIn/contains could link to isPartOf/hasPart > as defined by the Relation Ontology. > > I know Keneth and Ricardo have been working on some improvements. > Just let me know if you need any extra help for BioChemEntity, I > am happy to collaborate. > > Regards, > >
Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2018 09:37:32 UTC