why is the file name NCBI_NMOsp_v1.2.obo used only in the last example? Is it because there is no prefix?
if the IRIs are created by adding '#' to the prefix in the CURIE, then why not prefix 'NMOSp' is used in the same way?
these inconsistencies get more troublesome when merging the individuals separately to the input owl file, because the IRIs of the same terms are created differently in the two owl files.
Trying to create owl file from two step process
step#1: obo to owl conversion:
examples of inconsistently created IRIs for different identifiers: NMOSp:1000 --> http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/NMOSp_1000 nif_organism:birnlex_197 --> http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/nif_organism#_birnlex_197 MESH:D008822 --> http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MESH#_D008822 FBal0276838 --> http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/NCBI_NMOsp_v1.2.obo#FBal0276838
why is the file name NCBI_NMOsp_v1.2.obo used only in the last example? Is it because there is no prefix? if the IRIs are created by adding '#' to the prefix in the CURIE, then why not prefix 'NMOSp' is used in the same way?
these inconsistencies get more troublesome when merging the individuals separately to the input owl file, because the IRIs of the same terms are created differently in the two owl files.
step#2: individuals from template file:
FBal0276838 is created as http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/FBal0276838
Note the difference in IRIs in both cases.