cmungall / obo-foundry-operations-committee

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/obo-foundry-operations-committee
0 stars 0 forks source link

EPO loading OWL and OBO #116

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
http://www.berkeleybop.org/ontologies/obo-all/EPO/EPO.obo says "The requested 
URL /ontologies/obo-all/EPO/EPO.obo was not found on this server"

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcour...@gmail.com on 16 Oct 2013 at 9:07

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Ignore /obo-all/, legacy

http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/epo.obo
falls back to
http://www.berkeleybop.org/ontologies/epo.obo

which is empty. Because http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/epo.owl goes nowhere. 
Where's the source?

I'd recommend groups taking control of their own obo production using owltools 
and oort, there's inevitably translations required to get it from 
syntactically-valid-but-useless-to-obo-format-tools to useful.

Original comment by cmung...@gmail.com on 16 Oct 2013 at 10:59

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
The purl info gives 
id: /obo/epo.owl  
type: 302
target: 
https://epidemiology-ontology.googlecode.com/files/epidemiology_ontology.owl
maintainers: MELANIE,obo-epo

The target URL gives me a file "epidemiology_ontology.owl.xml"

I got the obo-all from the obofoundry table at 
http://www.obofoundry.org/cgi-bin/detail.cgi?id=EPO, not sure how those get 
generated?

Original comment by mcour...@gmail.com on 16 Oct 2013 at 11:06

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Hi Chris,

http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/epo.owl resolves for me, but still no OBO. I 
don't mind recommending use of owl tools and oort, but it seems odd that we 
would suggest there is something wrong with their OBO production,  considering 
they provide their resource in OWL, and we are the one adding on an OBO 
translation on the website.

Cheers,
Melanie

Original comment by mcour...@gmail.com on 5 Jun 2014 at 11:28

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
I think we should temporarily pull this ontology, it's using the EO ID space 
which is taken & will therefore cause clashes

Original comment by cmung...@gmail.com on 6 Jun 2014 at 12:00