Semantic artefacts often have a human readable name associated with an acronym. The name provides information about the general topic covered by the semantic artefact while the acronym can be used as prefix to create URI-based GUPRI for concepts and terms (see OBO Foundry naming convention). The governance of these names is managed by organisations such as the OBO Foundry or the Industry Ontology Foundry. As of now, there is no widespread consensus on the naming of semantic artefacts and the use of acronyms/ prefixes, which leads to ambiguities and non-uniqueness (see Goldfarb and Le Franc, 2017). The community of practice should consider addressing this issue by defining a common governance model for semantic artefacts.
Semantic artefacts often have a human readable name associated with an acronym. The name provides information about the general topic covered by the semantic artefact while the acronym can be used as prefix to create URI-based GUPRI for concepts and terms (see OBO Foundry naming convention). The governance of these names is managed by organisations such as the OBO Foundry or the Industry Ontology Foundry. As of now, there is no widespread consensus on the naming of semantic artefacts and the use of acronyms/ prefixes, which leads to ambiguities and non-uniqueness (see Goldfarb and Le Franc, 2017). The community of practice should consider addressing this issue by defining a common governance model for semantic artefacts.