OpenEnergyPlatform / ontology

Repository for the Open Energy Ontology (OEO)
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
111 stars 23 forks source link

OEO Import Structures #1756

Open h-spinde opened 1 year ago

h-spinde commented 1 year ago

Description of the issue

Currently, which file in the OEO imports which is a little confusing, with some files even being imported into multiple different other ones. The structure currently looks like this: oeo-import-structure.pdf

Ideas of solution

There should be some agreement over where each file should be imported into the OEO, so that the structure can be more intuitively understood and redundant imports can be avoided. Ideally, the diagram in the wiki under Modules of the OEO should also reflect the import structure.

Workflow checklist

l-emele commented 1 year ago

I agree that the current structure is confusing. The file readme.md contains this diagram after our large restructuring in issue #1592 for release 2.0.0:

Structure of the OEO

This is much cleaner and should work, too. I don't see a reason why a module is imported multiple times. Also imho oeo-physical-axioms should be imported directly to oeo-physical as it extends that module, but is irrelevant for the other modules.

stap-m commented 1 year ago

This is much cleaner and should work, too. I don't see a reason why a module is imported multiple times. Also imho oeo-physical-axioms should be imported directly to oeo-physical as it extends that module, but is irrelevant for the other modules.

@l-emele unfortunately, the figure in README / wiki is currently not the actual state, but the one prepared by @h-spinde.

I started testing an untangling process (see figure below) by importing oeo-import-edits into oeo-shared directly and by deleting omo-extracted (since redundant, based on #1755) in #1754.
@l-emele @h-spinde @nelekoehler @areleu could someone please check the current PR for inconsistencies?

grafik

l-emele commented 1 year ago

@l-emele unfortunately, the figure in README / wiki is currently not the actual state, but the one prepared by @h-spinde.

Ys, I know. But it depicts very well how the import structure should be. That is why I referenced it.

l-emele commented 1 year ago

@l-emele @h-spinde @nelekoehler @areleu could someone please check the current PR for inconsistencies?

I checked: In the PR branch OMO-defined annotations do not exist anymore. But we did not use them anyway.

l-emele commented 1 year ago

As you are updating the import structure, this seems also the right time to harmonise prefixes across ontology files, see issue #1651.

stap-m commented 1 year ago

I now also removed the redundant BFO import.

stap-m commented 12 months ago

Partially solved by #1754 I move it to the next milestone for the remaining parts.

stap-m commented 7 months ago

@areleu can we implement a test for imports that checks whether a certain class was already imported before (by another ontolotgy import), to avoid duplicate imports?