- 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