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

[bug] fix hasAvailability #644

Open
qjhart opened this issue Oct 29, 2024 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #654
Open

[bug] fix hasAvailability #644

qjhart opened this issue Oct 29, 2024 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #654
Assignees

Comments

@qjhart
Copy link
Collaborator

qjhart commented Oct 29, 2024

The current hasAvailability only propoagates the experts' hasAvailability urls to the document. setup. I propose that we more accurately represent this with the preferred label as well, so...

{
  "_id": "expert/LDdgBTXN",
  "_version": 74,
  "_source": {
    "@id": "expert/LDdgBTXN",
    "@context": "http://localhost/api/schema/1/context.jsonld",
    "@graph": [],
   "hasAvailability": [{
          "skos:prefLabel": "Collaborative projects",
          "availabilityOf": "expert/LDdgBTXN",
          "@type": "Concept",
          "@id": "ark:/87287/d7mh2m/keyword/c-ucd-avail/Collaborative%20projects",
          "skos:inScheme": {
            "@id": "ark:/87287/d7mh2m/keyword/c-ucd-avail/"
          }
        }],
        "orcidId": "0000-0001-9829-8914",
        "@id": "expert/LDdgBTXN"
        }

This is more standard with our practice of just promoting @graph components to the document level.
Furthermore, we base the hasAvailability index in elastic search on the prefLabel so that filters will look like

/search?q=hart&hasAvailability=Collaborative%20projects

And finnally our schema will promote skos:prefLabel to prefLabel

@qjhart
Copy link
Collaborator Author

qjhart commented Nov 18, 2024

@UcDust does this seem reasonable? UI effects should be limited to your search formulation only, AFAIK.

@UcDust
Copy link
Collaborator

UcDust commented Nov 18, 2024

@qjhart yea this seems like it would work.

@qjhart qjhart linked a pull request Nov 19, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants