search

metaclip / ontologies

METACLIP core ontologies
http://www.metaclip.org
MIT License
2 stars 2 forks source link

Possibility of expanding the vocabularies #5

Open apuiggros opened 6 months ago

apuiggros commented 6 months ago

Hi, I'm currently integrating METACLIP into "SUNSET," an R-based workflow developed at the Earth Sciences department of the Barcelona Supercomputing Center (BSC). SUNSET is a modular tool for sub-seasonal to seasonal to decadal forecast verification, managing NetCDF[2] files from various climate data sources. Our aim is to directly embed all provenance information from the METACLIP framework into the R code.

While the ontology has proven useful, we require additional vocabularies to fully describe the transformations applied to data within a single workflow, particularly regarding calibration operations and verification metrics.

To accomplish this, we propose adding several new methods as SubClasses of cal: NonParametricBiasCorrection and cal:ESD, including a new SubClass like ESD-CSDownscale. Additionally, we aim to enhance the verification ontology by introducing a new entity SubClass ver: VerificationMetrics. Moreover, expanding the Individuals, such as ModellingCenters or DataProviders, would greatly benefit our workflow.

We're unsure whether it's possible to add these through a merge request or if it's acceptable to METACLIP. Additionally, we're uncertain whether the extension should involve adding more vocabularies to the current METACLIP ontologies or creating a new ontology with a different prefix (e.g., "sunset:"). Ideally, we'd like to extend the METACLIP ontology for our purposes.

Thank you.

jbedia commented 6 months ago

Hi, thanks for your post, the sunset framework sounds really interesting. Pull-requests to attend user needs are very welcome. My suggestions is that each addition is performed separately, and we can discuss the more convenient entities in each case. Whether to extend METACLIP or creating a new vocabulary largely depends on your needs and requirements, but from our side we are open to undertake the required additions to the METACLIP ontologies as long as these are consistent with the conceptual framework. Please feel free to send your pull requests; we can discuss in person specific details of the new entities in case you prefer. Best regards. Joaquín.

apuiggros commented 6 months ago

Hi, it would be preferable for us to discuss the specific details in person, so that we can define what we would like to include in the METACLIP ontology according to the conceptual framework before sending a pull request. Also, if it's possible to directly include the new elements in the current ontology (would be in cal: and ver:) , that's fine with us.

I have drafted a breif description of each of the elements (mostly individuals) we would like to add and how we could fit them in METACLIP. You can take a look at it in: https://earth.bsc.es/gitlab/es/sunset/-/issues/104 (The comment is quite large and definitions need to be revised still)

If it's fine with you, we could arrange a meeting to delve deeper into this matter. If so, let me know what timeframes work better to you to find a suitable time.

Thank you,

Albert

jbedia commented 6 months ago

Great, thanks. Please contact me by e-mail. This week works fine with me. Best regards. Joaquin