As we discussed in P-Rec. 10, semantic artefacts are often developed to describe a specific aspect of a scientific domain. Despite this reduced scope, several models of the same aspects can co-exist. They are either developed de novo or developed as a part of another ontology. This duplication is often due to the lack of knowledge regarding existing semantic artefact. In order to aggregate distributed resources aligned with these different models, it is necessary to create mapping relations between the different elements of different semantic artefacts.
In many cases, these mapping are based on existing relations such as sameAs from SKOS. However, mappings can become complex especially when considering the logical relations or to represent content drift is a potential risk as well as context insensitive use of semantic artefacts and there are no common descriptions for such complex mappings. Mappings are often created by individuals for satisfying a specific need. Information regarding the provenance and usage of these mappings are of importance for any practitioner who would be interested in reusing them.
This recommendation aims at highlighting this gap and to emphasize the need for a machine readable description of mapping which fosters interoperability.
We are developing and rolling out a Simple Standard for mapping between ontologies (SSSOM, see docs). Here is another discussion of some related work (very incomplete). It is also always good to consult with @ernestojimenezruiz on issues like that due to his long year involvement with the OAEI (http://oaei.ontologymatching.org/).
+1 to treating mappings as "first class" resources with decoupled governance from the mapping targets. a mechanism for publishing and finding mappings is essential for a registry service.
NVS publishes internal and external mappings using the SKOS properties broader, narrower and related. It also uses owl:sameAs. Each mapping is associated with a unique URI where additional information about the provenance of the mapping is captured.
Description
As we discussed in P-Rec. 10, semantic artefacts are often developed to describe a specific aspect of a scientific domain. Despite this reduced scope, several models of the same aspects can co-exist. They are either developed de novo or developed as a part of another ontology. This duplication is often due to the lack of knowledge regarding existing semantic artefact. In order to aggregate distributed resources aligned with these different models, it is necessary to create mapping relations between the different elements of different semantic artefacts.
In many cases, these mapping are based on existing relations such as sameAs from SKOS. However, mappings can become complex especially when considering the logical relations or to represent content drift is a potential risk as well as context insensitive use of semantic artefacts and there are no common descriptions for such complex mappings. Mappings are often created by individuals for satisfying a specific need. Information regarding the provenance and usage of these mappings are of importance for any practitioner who would be interested in reusing them.
This recommendation aims at highlighting this gap and to emphasize the need for a machine readable description of mapping which fosters interoperability.
Existing recommendations:
● DOOR[45]
Stakeholder: Practitioner
We are developing and rolling out a Simple Standard for mapping between ontologies (SSSOM, see docs). Here is another discussion of some related work (very incomplete). It is also always good to consult with @ernestojimenezruiz on issues like that due to his long year involvement with the OAEI (http://oaei.ontologymatching.org/).
+1 to treating mappings as "first class" resources with decoupled governance from the mapping targets. a mechanism for publishing and finding mappings is essential for a registry service.
NVS publishes internal and external mappings using the SKOS properties broader, narrower and related. It also uses owl:sameAs. Each mapping is associated with a unique URI where additional information about the provenance of the mapping is captured.