Basically SSSO Mapping corresponds to JSKOS Concept Mapping and SSSO MappingSet corresponds to JSKOS Concordance (although SSSO MappingSet may be broader as it can contain mappings between more then two vocabularies). SSSO properties/fields/slots of both Mapping and MappingSet respectively should have correspondence in JSKOS.
At BioHackathon 2015 a list of fields for ontology metadata mapping were collected (see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7141167/). This work later resulted in the Simple Standard for Sharing Ontological Mappings (SSSOM) (see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9216545/, the section on related works and https://w3id.org/sssom/). SSSOM and JSKOS have evolved independently with simlar goals and should be aligned. I started discussion to get to know each other at https://github.com/mapping-commons/sssom/discussions/250 and alignment at https://github.com/mapping-commons/sssom/issues/249.
Basically SSSO Mapping corresponds to JSKOS Concept Mapping and SSSO MappingSet corresponds to JSKOS Concordance (although SSSO MappingSet may be broader as it can contain mappings between more then two vocabularies). SSSO properties/fields/slots of both Mapping and MappingSet respectively should have correspondence in JSKOS.
Mapping
from.memberSet[].uri
from.memberSet[].prefLabel
from.memberSet[].type
??type
to.memberSet[].uri
to.memberSet[].prefLabel
to.memberSet[].type
??creator[].uri
creator[].prefLabel
contributor[].uri
contributor[].prefLabel
license
of the Concordancefrom.memberSet[].type
??from.memberSet[].inScheme
?from.memberSet[].type
??to.memberSet[].inScheme
?created
mappingRelevance
(experimental)note
or doable with annotationsMost relevant open issues:
mapping_justification
as new JSKOS fieldjustification
.mapping_tool
mappingRelevance
toconfidence
or keep it and adjust definition?predicate_modifier
be mapped to a null-mapping or are there other cases as well?subject_type
/object_type
vs.subject_category
/object_category
MappingSet
to be done