-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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
Add upgrate step to migrate terms from VCGE 1 to 2 #56
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Podia usar o termo replaces e o SKOS como no 06c89a7#diff-26ba68ca88173fa2bfef120ac72f89efR73 Nunca terminei esse feature mas creio que seja o mais fácil. Faltou, pelo menos, fazer o que o idgserpro comentou #29 (comment) Editei. Estava replacedBy mas fiz confusão. |
@caduvieira não entendi onde e por que tu quer usar esse |
O replaces tem a semântica de que um termo foi trocado por outro conforme http://dublincore.org/2012/06/14/dcterms#replaces e o replacedBy é o inverso desse. |
# ignore terms with no equivalence | ||
for term in obj.skos: | ||
if term in self.equivalences: | ||
new += self.equivalences[term] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In this case all terms would be migrated? or are there any example of term that would remain as it is from old to new version?
for example, we have 3 old terms ['term1', 'term2', 'term3'];
'term2' should be replaced by 'term4' and 'term3' by 'term5';
with the code written now, the result would be ['term4', 'term5'] because 'term1' is not into equivalences
dict.
Is it fine like this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yes, check the tests.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added one question
There is no such thing as VCGE 1. There is VCGE 2011 and there is VCGE 2. How exactly do you propose replacing VCGE 2011 terms with VCGE 2 terms? SKOS has neither a Notwithstanding the technical difficulty that in most cases you won't find a term to map to in VCGE 2, you would also lose a lot of information by migrating, considering that VCGE 2 is too generic. Which makes me wonder why would anyone even want to migrate to it in the first place. If the reason for migrating is that VCGE 2011 is no longer maintained, consider instead migrating to a more useful vocabulary, such as Eurovoc. |
@augusto-herrmann a migração do VCGE 1 para o VCGE 2 está documentada aqui e a maioria dos casos está coberta:
eu não estou qualificado para opinar sobre o vocabulário nem seu uso, meu único interesse é prover a migração pois não é mais recomendado usar o branch 1.x deste pacote. esse é o escopo deste pull request; qualquer outro assunto deve ser tratado em outro lugar. |
7ddcb6a
to
05355cd
Compare
05355cd
to
5e11536
Compare
Entendo. Eu não vejo mais razão de existir para esse pacote. A partir de agora vou parar de segui-lo e não comentarei mais em suas threads e issues. |
alguém mais pode por favor revisar isso aqui? @AlexandreChagas este PR soluciona seu problema, se ainda é um problema. |
closes #25