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

Some vocabulary annotations only work from the config.properties file, not from the TTL source #614

Closed
Zack-83 opened this issue Aug 18, 2023 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug pressing Will fix issue in next release
Milestone

Comments

@Zack-83
Copy link
Contributor

Zack-83 commented Aug 18, 2023

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I really appreciate the new update of the software and documentation.

It seems that the config.properties cannot be completely dropped yet. Some vocabulary annotations do not have an equivalent annotation property (extended-/importedOntologyNames/-URIs; latestVersionURI), while some others are overwritten/superseded by the ones from the config file (ontologyName; dateOfRelease).

As an example, the table of content snapshot was generated asasigning rdfs:label in the TTL and commenting ontologyName in the config.

image

An overview of the missing/problematic fields is given in the table below.

Metadata category Ontology annotation property* config.properties field(s)** Remarks
Modification date dcterms:modified, schema:dateModified modified, dateOfRelease dateOfRelease supersedes modified
Ontology name ??? ontologyName rdfs:label does not work: requires ontologyName
Extended ontologies ??? extendedOntologyNames, extendedOntologyURIs only in config.properties, not in TTL
Imported ontologies owl:imports? importedOntologyNames, importedOntologyURIs only in config.properties, not in TTL
Latest version ??? latestVersionURI only in config.properties, not in TTL
Serialization ??? RDFXML-/Turtle-/N3-/JSONLDSerialization only in config.properties, not in TTL

Describe the solution you'd like
Either we find and implement suitable annotation properties, or we specify in the two guides that some annotations should be input necessarily through the config file.

I can help with the documentation.

@dgarijo
Copy link
Owner

dgarijo commented Aug 18, 2023

Ontology Name should be the title, if I remember correctly. And the latest version is driven (or should be) by vann:preferredNamespaceUri. I will have to have a look at the others. There is an overlap with recent issues, but I do agree these problems are pressing

@dgarijo dgarijo added bug pressing Will fix issue in next release labels Aug 18, 2023
@dgarijo dgarijo self-assigned this Aug 18, 2023
@dgarijo dgarijo added this to the v1.4.xx milestone Aug 18, 2023
@Zack-83
Copy link
Contributor Author

Zack-83 commented Aug 18, 2023

Ontology Name should be the title, if I remember correctly. And the latest version is driven (or should be) by vann:preferredNamespaceUri. I will have to have a look at the others. There is an overlap with recent issues, but I do agree these problems are pressing

vann:preferredNamespaceUri is the current version (not necessarily the last one).
ontologyName is just one word (ex.: "Metadata4Ing") while the ontologyTitle is a half-sentence (ex.: "Metadata4Ing: An ontology for describing the generation of research data within a scientific activity.")

@dgarijo
Copy link
Owner

dgarijo commented Aug 18, 2023

The namespace URI is the ontology URI, so it should be the one for last version (it should not change across different versions). owl:versionIRI should be the one for this version. Don't you agree?
I agree about the title. Maybe we can use the rdfs:label of the ontology.

dgarijo added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 21, 2023
@dgarijo
Copy link
Owner

dgarijo commented Aug 26, 2023

Latest commits fix this issue. I will do a release implementing in the next couple of days

@dgarijo dgarijo closed this as completed Aug 26, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug pressing Will fix issue in next release
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants