Closed ronaldtse closed 3 years ago
@ronaldtse Just want to double-check: this is relationship between concepts, not their translations, correct?
Correct - concepts, not translations. Thanks!
Thanks! More questions ahead @ronaldtse.
Concept 102-01-10
supersedes 102-01-10:2007-08
; concept 102-01-20
supersedes 102-01-20:2007-08
; concept 102-05-16
supersedes 102-05-16:2007-08
. Term ID stays the same. Is it okay or some bug in the spreadsheet?
How to represent these relationships? Is following okay?
- type: supersedes
termid: 102-01-10
content: 102-01-10:2007-08
Or maybe following would be better:
- type: supersedes
content: 102-01-10:2007-08
Or maybe something else?
Our diagrams distinguish ref
and content
, but honestly, I don't understand the difference.
Should I write these relationships at root level (which seems logical) or in the English term (like main authoritative source)? I mean which of following YAML examples is better? This:
termid: 102-01-10
term: function
relationships:
- type: supersedes
content: 102-01-10:2007-08
or maybe this:
termid: 102-01-10
term: function
eng:
relationships:
- type: supersedes
content: 102-01-10:2007-08
?
BTW, isn't it a duplicate of #34?
It's clearly a duplicate. I've copied the conversation to the other issue, and I'm closing this one.
The new REPLACES column indicates which term a term supersedes.
The value is typically in the form of “XXX-XX-XX:YYYY-MM” where X represents an IEV ID, YYYY the year and MM the month.
We should enact this as a “relationship” just like how the SOURCE gets parsed as relationships. This should be encoded as a “supersedes” relationship.