You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
An IRI or similar locator for a request or discussion of an ontology term.
What is a "similar locator"?
There is no range specified for this AP
IMO this should be strictly restricted to URLs to make it all useful. Otherwise it may as well be crammed into a comment. We are not dublin core.
For example, if we want code in OAK that validates IAO:0000233 by checking if a URL is valid (and using OAK-LLM to check if the content of the tracker aligns with the term) this will break if fed non URLs. The code would need to do bespoke parsing of the value.
Currently on OBO there are 229 uses of this
57 uses of relative locators (#NNN). This is bad practice. URLs should be used
However, one non-OBO ontology, OEO is using this in a slightly different way, with a range of string with multiple URLs embedded
If we were to go with my recommendation this would break things for them, so we need to coordinate. cc @jannahastings
I think this speaks to the need to be simple and clear in OMO definitions, if the metadata is to be at all usable in a consistent way. It's always much harder to fix this after the fact once terms are in the wild and we later discover everyone is using them differently
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/IAO_0000233
An IRI or similar locator for a request or discussion of an ontology term.
What is a "similar locator"?
There is no range specified for this AP
IMO this should be strictly restricted to URLs to make it all useful. Otherwise it may as well be crammed into a comment. We are not dublin core.
For example, if we want code in OAK that validates IAO:0000233 by checking if a URL is valid (and using OAK-LLM to check if the content of the tracker aligns with the term) this will break if fed non URLs. The code would need to do bespoke parsing of the value.
Currently on OBO there are 229 uses of this
#NNN
). This is bad practice. URLs should be usedHowever, one non-OBO ontology, OEO is using this in a slightly different way, with a range of string with multiple URLs embedded
If we were to go with my recommendation this would break things for them, so we need to coordinate. cc @jannahastings
I think this speaks to the need to be simple and clear in OMO definitions, if the metadata is to be at all usable in a consistent way. It's always much harder to fix this after the fact once terms are in the wild and we later discover everyone is using them differently
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: