Closed nichtich closed 5 years ago
I would suggest using "Registry" as specified in JSKOS (to make it consistent). I would also propose that there is actually no need to differentiate between terminology registries, mapping registries, and occurrence registries. It would be enough to have one config field "registries" which contains all the different ones in JSKOS format and Cocoda can decide which ones to use in which situation based on the available properties.
Suggested part of a config file to merge mappingProviders
, occurrenceProviders
, and part of terminologyProviders
:
{
"registries": [
{
"mappings": "//coli-conc.gbv.de/api/mappings/",
"prefLabel": { "en": "Mapping Database" }
}, {
"occurrences": "//coli-conc.gbv.de/occurrences/api/",
"notation": ["O"],
"prefLabel": { "en": "Occurrences", "de": "Vorkommen" }
}, {
"mappings": "//example.org/mappings",
"occurrences": "//example.org/occurrences",
"prefLabel": { "en": "Example" },
"notation": ["E"]
},{
"schemes": [ {
"uri": "http://bartoc.org/en/node/430",
"prefLabel": { "de": "Gemeinsame Normdatei" },
"notation": ["GND"]
} ],
"concepts": "//coli-conc.gbv.de/services/gnd.php",
"suggestConcepts": "//ws.gbv.de/suggest/gnd/?searchterm={searchTerms}"
}
]
}
I'm closing this issue as the config file format has been changed. Based on this change, #209 will be implemented.
The https://gbv.github.io/jskos/jskos.html#registries for the current draft of "Registries" in JSKOS. We can rename in
terminologyProviders
:data
toconcepts
andvoc
toschemes
. Theurl
field may be renamed toendpoint
but this needs further discussion and examples.The content of
mappingProviders
andoccurrenceProviders
may also be modified later, e.g.Field
occurrences
is not included in JSKOS specification for registries yet.Open question: name "Registry" or "Provider"?