Re: New Work Item Proposal: Traceability Vocabulary

Yes, I have struggled with the periodic table ever since 8th grade :)

Luckily this spec table is generated from json, so it's very easy to update.

After looking at the OWL (and briefly crying about sameAs and its inability
to make friends with DIDs), I am wondering how best to update the table.

It seems like Elements should be Classes.

It also seems like unlike schema.org and GS1, those ontologies linked do
not produce nice term URLs... I would prefer to be able to provide nice
IRIs for all classes.

http://www.daml.org/2003/01/periodictable/PeriodicTable#H

http://purl.bioontology.org/ontology/SNOMEDCT/2309006

Feels bad seeing SNOWMEDCT, and also not having an easy structure to
parse... can't be tasked with building URLs by hand ever again :)

I have encountered issues related to obtaining usable structured data on
this front.

Would love to be pointed in a better direction, this does seem like a
problem someone else most have solved better since 2003 :)

OS




On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 8:54 AM Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
wrote:

> On 10/1/20 9:09 AM, Orie Steele wrote:
> > If supply chain traceability and verifiable credentials are of interest
> > to you, we welcome additional contributors, this is going to be
> > challenging work.
>
> +1 to the vocabulary and the way you're going about auto-generating it.
> It's a best practice that we need to build some tooling around (and have
> needed to for over a decade). We're really going to need that tooling if
> the VC stuff takes off -- vocabulary linting, assertion of best
> practices, etc.
>
> +1 to this work item in the W3C CCG as well.
>
> A few thoughts on the vocabulary:
>
> * Use of GS1 vocabulary for location is a good call.
>   Citizenship vocabulary uses schema.org. We'll want to
>   see how easily we can map one to the other.
>
> * We should declare periodic table elements in a
>   traceability vocabulary. DARPA did this work in 2003:
>
> http://explore.dublincore.net/learning_resource/periodic-table-in-owl/
>
>   There is also the Ontology of Chemical Elements, which is
>   current and put together by biometical ontologists:
>
> https://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/OCE/?p=summary
>
>   At the very least, we really should involve chemists,
>   physicists, etc. to determine how this work should be done.
>
>   Raised as:
>
> https://github.com/transmute-industries/traceability-vocab/issues/1
>
> * I'd model the percent composition differently... as a
>   separate node:
>
>   "chemicalComposition": [{
>     "id": "Tc"
>     "percentage": "84.61"
>   }, {
>     "id": "Mc"
>     "percentage": "46.95"
>   },{
>     "id": "Og"
>     "percentage": "83.5"
>   }]
>
>   As a side note, it's confusing that those percentages don't
>   add up to 100 in the example, but I'm assuming that's just
>   the autogenerated stuff being wonky?
>
>   Raised as:
>
> https://github.com/transmute-industries/traceability-vocab/issues/2
>
> Overall, looking like a great start!
>
> -- manu
>
> --
> Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches
> https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches
>
>

-- 
*ORIE STEELE*
Chief Technical Officer
www.transmute.industries

<https://www.transmute.industries>