- From: ljgarcia <ljgarcia@ebi.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 18:56:09 +0000
- To: Luca Cherubin <cherubin@ebi.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-bioschemas@w3.org
Hi Luca, Matt, I think you have not got feedback on the original matter, "CategoryCode as valid type for valueReference for any PropertyValue in Bioschemas/schema.org". +1 on my side, it makes sense not only for Samples but it should be useful as well for other profiles. Regards, On 2018-03-19 11:10, Luca Cherubin wrote: > Hi everybody, > > During the Hackathon event last week with various Biobanks > representatives we had the chance to use Bioschemas profiles and types > to support BioBanks use cases for metadata sharing. > > As you may know, in the Sample profile we proposed a solution for > linking ontology terms to a PropertyValue using CategoryCode as valid > type for the valueReference field. Note that CategoryCode is already a > proposed schema.org [1] type but in the bioschemas/samples > specification we propose that it should be an acceptable value for > valueReference. > > To support BioBank use cases, we are using DataRecord and they need to > use the same CategoryCode strategy to describe all the PropertyValue > associated with a DataRecord. > > In our opinion this is a very strong use case for supporting the use > of CategoryCode as valid type for valueReference for any PropertyValue > in Bioschemas/schema.org [1], not only for the Sample profile. We can > see this being very useful in other areas where there is a need for a > flexible linking of ontology terms to values. > > We would like to get your feedback on this. > > Best regards, > > Luca and Matt > > Links: > ------ > [1] http://schema.org
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2018 18:56:33 UTC