Closed stap-m closed 1 month ago
I agree that we should import characteristic of
from RO. But as has bearer
is currently used more than 100 times I suggest that we do no replace our has bearer
with characteristic of
but instead declare has bearer
as equivalent to characteristic of
. This avoids the tedious work of adapting so many axioms.
Maybe we should import this whole branch of object properties:
I agree that we should import
characteristic of
from RO. But ashas bearer
is currently used more than 100 times I suggest that we do no replace ourhas bearer
withcharacteristic of
but instead declarehas bearer
as equivalent tocharacteristic of
. This avoids the tedious work of adapting so many axioms.
I think this is rather a find-and-replace job and managable. But we can discuss this in a meeting.
I think this is rather a find-and-replace job and managable. But we can discuss this in a meeting.
Only if you neglect the term trackers... It put in on the agenda for the next OEO dev meeting.
From Dev meeting 76:
Aufgaben:
- disposition of
- function of
- quality of
- role of
Replace?
Wer macht es? @areleu (@stap-m , kannst du unterstützen und nochmal den workflow erklären?)
I can do the import and you do the integration/mapping within OEO @areleu?
I can do the import and you do the integration/mapping within OEO @areleu?
Sure, I also wanted to understand how should the oeo-tools used now. Should it be cloned inside the OEO repo?
Ok. Here's the workflow
Description of the issue
We currently import
has characteristic
from RO, but not its inversecharacteristic of
. Instead we defined our own relationhas bearer
. It is good practice to reuse extisting relations and terms, especially from well-established and widely used ontologies like RO. Therefore, we should think about replacinghas bearer
withcharacteristic of
.Workflow checklist
I am aware that