Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Sync JSON-LD context with JSON-LD output from vocab #10

Open
ariutta opened this issue Oct 10, 2017 · 6 comments
Open

Sync JSON-LD context with JSON-LD output from vocab #10

ariutta opened this issue Oct 10, 2017 · 6 comments

Comments

@ariutta
Copy link
Contributor

ariutta commented Oct 10, 2017

I had been using a JSON-LD context, but it appears we can generate JSON-LD from our RDFa? Maybe these should be synced.

@AlasdairGray
Copy link
Member

It would definitely be good to have these synced, otherwise we are prone to them diverging.

There is a recently published working draft on Microdata that has a section on converting between Microdata, RDFa, and JSON-LD.

@ariutta
Copy link
Contributor Author

ariutta commented Oct 13, 2017

I started trying to sync the BridgeDb vocab with these three items:

Action Items:

  • do the about and datatype columns look correct in datasources_headers.txt?
  • the response to this webservice query is ENSG00000160791 Ensembl. Is ENSG00000160791 an identifier, an ID or something else? This would be for use in the Swagger doc and JSON-LD context.
  • what is the IRI for identifier (or whatever we want to call it)? Maybe rdf:ID or schema:identifier (suggested by @AlasdairGray) or biopax:id or http://www.rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/#P60052?
  • for that same query, is Ensembl an instance of bdb:conventionalName?
  • if we have multiple instances of CCR5 in a pathway, what name should we use to set ENSG00000160791 and Ensembl as properties of each instance? How about {"dataSourceConventionalName": "ENSG00000160791", "dataSourceIdentifier": "ENSG00000160791"}?

@AlasdairGray
Copy link
Member

AlasdairGray commented Oct 13, 2017

It might be worth using some Schema terms in the JSON-LD, e.g. schema:identifier. You could look at the Bioschemas specifications [fixed link - AR] for suggestions for marking up various types resources.

@ariutta
Copy link
Contributor Author

ariutta commented Oct 13, 2017

@AlasdairGray, I support using terms from Schema/Bioschemas.

Action Items

  • Do we have a consensus on using terms from Schema/Bioschemas?
  • Should there be any bdb terms that are exact matches with terms from Schema/Bioschemas? Is bdb:DataSource an exact match for schema:Dataset?

@AlasdairGray
Copy link
Member

bdb:DataSource and schema:Dataset are not exactly the same thing. The bdb:DataSource includes notions of the schema:DataCatalog, which would be the issuer of the identifiers.

The question is then whether they are operationally equivalent for most circumstances?

@ariutta
Copy link
Contributor Author

ariutta commented Oct 18, 2017

Once @egonw finishes up some other deadlines, maybe he can weigh in on bdb:DataSource vs. schema:Dataset vs. schema:DataCatalog. I'm happy to use whatever the rest of the BridgeDb community prefers.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants