- From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 17:14:56 +0100
- To: public-bioschemas@w3.org
In upcoming RO-Crate 1.1 we want to align closer with the Workflow
profile 0.5 - see <https://github.com/ResearchObject/ro-crate/pull/81/>
I understand Workflow profile is being prepared and that we agreed that
Workflow will be a proposed new subtype of <http://schema.org/SoftwareSourceCode>
instead of just a profile of it (it adds new properties that make
less sense on other source code).
Part of this profile is also some new properties like "input" and
"output" which I am worried the schema.org community may find too
general - say they want to rename "input" to "expectsInput" and "output"
to "producesOutput".
I am not sure which URIs to refer to these new BioSchemas terms from the
RO-Crate JSON-LD context - I know they target to become
<http://schema.org/input> etc, while that may currently seem
uncertain we still want to go ahead with BioSchemas alignment in
RO-Crate.
RO-Crate is targetting long-term archival (e.g. Zenodo) and so we
have our own JSON-LD context that includes a versioned snapshot of
schema.org terms, e.g. <https://w3id.org/ro/crate/1.0/context>
refers to schemaVersion <http://schema.org/version/5.0/>
"schemaVersion": {
"@id": "http://schema.org/version/5.0/"
},
(next RO-Crate context will be updated for
<http://schema.org/version/8.0/> terms)
We need to have a mapping to URI for all JSON terms in order for it to
survive JSON-LD processing and parsing to RDF.
It is an important principle for us that clicking the URLs from the
RO-Crate context gives a human-readable definition - obviously that
won't be the case for new URIs like http://schema.org/Workflow until
later (or perhaps never if the term is renamed..)
One advantage we have is that each RO-Crate JSON-LD context release
can document exactly which versioned BioSchemas profiles it is based:
"isBasedOn": [
{ "@id": "http://schema.org/version/8.0/" },
{ "@id": "https://pcdm.org/2016/04/18/models" },
{ "@id": "https://bioschemas.org/profiles/Workflow/0.5-DRAFT-2020_xx_xx/" }
],
In my current draft the RO-Crate JSON-LD adds the term mapping:
"input": "https://bioschemas.org/profiles/Workflow/0.5-DRAFT-2020_xx_xx/#input",
"output": "https://bioschemas.org/profiles/Workflow/0.5-DRAFT-2020_xx_xx/#output",
"format": "https://bioschemas.org/profiles/Workflow/0.5-DRAFT-2020_xx_xx/#format",
"FormalParameter": "https://bioschemas.org/profiles/Workflow/0.5-DRAFT-2020_xx_xx/#FormalParameter",
(pending 0.5-DRAFT release date)
I notice this is a hack, e.g. the page
https://bioschemas.org/profiles/Workflow/0.4-DRAFT-2020_05_11/ do not
have any helpful HTML id tags (except id="btnCommunity" which appears
multipe times?) and so I can't link to the correct row - there is no
"#input" on the page.
I also understand that for Workflow to become a new BioSchemas type it
would need to be added to https://bioschemas.org/types/ which is
probably better target for my "hack" - e.g. <https://bioschemas.org/Taxon>
already redirects to
<https://bioschemas.org/types/Taxon/0.3-RELEASE-2019_11_18/> although
that does not work for properties like
<https://bioschemas.org/childTaxon>
However I now notice that (unlike on the profile pages) the HTML of
types do have correct `id` for the corresponding rows, so
https://bioschemas.org/Taxon#childTaxon
would refer to the correct table row:
<tr id="childTaxon">
<th style="color: #0B794B;">childTaxon</th>
<td>
<a style="color: #0B794B;" href="/types/drafts/Taxon">Taxon</a> or<br>
<a href="http://schema.org/Text">Text</a> or<br>
<a href="http://schema.org/URL">URL</a>
</td>
<td>
Closest child taxa of the taxon in question. <br>
Inverse property: <span style="color: #0B794B;">parentTaxon</span>
</td>
</tr>
(although the browser for some reason does not scroll there)
So any suggestions? So far I think we should use
https://bioschemas.org/Workflows#input> assuming a similar page will get
created there.
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes, The University of Manchester
https://www.esciencelab.org.uk/
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Please note that I may work flexibly – whilst it suits me to email now,
I do not expect a response or action outside of your own working hours.
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2020 16:15:13 UTC