Open dr-shorthair opened 3 years ago
FLOPO uses PO in its axioms and directly links to PO. FLOPO is not an ontology of traits but phenotypes (traits plus their values); as such, it complements TO. Not sure about the status of FLOPO, but currently it is being used in particular in the context of floras and images.
ontology of [...] phenotypes (traits plus their values); as such, it complements TO.
Does FLOPO explicitly use TO for trait definitions? Or does is reproduce combinations of PO and PATO that are also found in TO?
FLOPO does not explicitly use TO. Therefore, it may reproduce some trait classes that are also found in TO.
As an addition: the reason for not relying on TO is that TO has very few axioms, and mapping to or reusing TO would be largely a manual exercise or based on label matching. FLOPO is a fully defined ontology, i.e., 100% of its classes have an axiomatic definition.
And what is the relationship with PO and TO?