RDFBones / RDFBones-O

An RDF ontology for research data from physical anthropology and related fields of expertise.
4 stars 1 forks source link

phaleron-si: Vertebral ROIs with wrong superclasses #191

Open cuboideum opened 1 year ago

cuboideum commented 1 year ago

The following ROIs describing parts of vertebrae are currently defined as subclasses of 'Entire vertebra' (rdfbones:EntireBoneOrgan_fma9914):

There are two problems with these elements:

  1. They describe entities that are not entire vertebrae but segments of vertebrae (class standards-si:SegmentOfVertebra).
  2. Labels and URIs do not follow RDFBones naming conventions reserving the term 'entire' for entire bone organs.

There are of 'Segment of vertebra' (standards-si:SegmentOfVertebra) corresponding to the classes listed above:

The problematic class definitions need to be removed and the correct ones used instead.

cuboideum commented 1 year ago

AnthroGraph's PBP app uses the faulty classes instead of the correct ones.

I suggest to declare the faulty classes as equivalent classes of the correct ones and deprecate them.

@zarquon42b: What do you think? Will the faulty classes losing their current superclasses compromise the PBP App*s functionality in AnthroGraph?

zarquon42b commented 1 year ago

I don't really understand the question.

  1. If the faulty classes are instantiated at the moment => problem
  2. If only the superclasses are wrong and the instantiations are correct => no problem.

I suggest to declare the faulty classes as equivalent classes of the correct ones and deprecate them.

The equivalence statement does absolutely nothing to the functionality of the application only to the consistency of the ontology

cuboideum commented 1 year ago

Unfortunately, option 1 is correct. We do have a problem.

The equivalence statement does absolutely nothing to the functionality of the application only to the consistency of the ontology

Correct. That is the objective of the maneuver.

Can we proceed as suggested, then?