Closed cmungall closed 9 years ago
Note we have
"source": {
"id": "nlx_151671-2",
"label": "ClinVar, via Office of Rare Diseases (9435)"
}
And
"source": {
"id": "nlx_151671-2",
"label": "ClinVar, via NCBI curation"
}
The relationship between id and label is functional.
The via part should probably be modeled in the relationship between data and source (it is already?)
@cmungall I would use OBI or ERO for techniques for the interactions. We'll need these for expression and phentoyping in some cases too. We should pull in a slice of these two ontologies - assays and techniques. @mbrush can you help with this?
For summary, maybe one of these: http://purl.org/dc/terms/description http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#definition Probably prefer the former.
@mellybelly the techniques in the BioGrid interaction data map to the PSI-MI 'ontology' (http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/mi.owl), which is actually a pretty rich vocabulary. We should consider if we would use the IRIs from this ontology, or try to get terms into OBI/ERO with mappings to PSI-MI terms. As for any additional techniques needed, I can work to get them into OBI and/or ERO as needed.
BioGrid techniques are here: http://wiki.thebiogrid.org/doku.php/experimental_systems Earlier JIRA ticket about this is here: https://support.crbs.ucsd.edu/browse/NIF-11813
No longer relevant but we should create a new issue for exporting data as JSON.
E.g. Note some of these will require further discussion
http://127.0.0.1:8282/gene/NCBIGene:388552.json
General