This issue is associated with the charter epic #5.
What specific aspect(s) does this issue address?
As data is a broad term we should discuss whether we should differentiate between data formats.
A paper publication (which is still data, at least for some consortia) has other schema requirements than for example an SQL-esque table like an excel file. This may result in different best practices for data schemas, for example, a paper publication might be intended to use the Cito Ontology (https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html) inside while Process descriptions should use xmi (XML Metadata Interchange https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML_Metadata_Interchange)
What further steps are needed to be taken or discussed by/in our WG regarding this issue?
[ ] Collect common schema types
[ ] Discuss whether these schemas are data type bound and therefore discuss whether we need to differentiate between data types
[ ] Activle participates in collecting schema types by posting them as a comment down below
This issue is associated with the charter epic #5.
What specific aspect(s) does this issue address?
As data is a broad term we should discuss whether we should differentiate between data formats.
A paper publication (which is still data, at least for some consortia) has other schema requirements than for example an SQL-esque table like an excel file. This may result in different best practices for data schemas, for example, a paper publication might be intended to use the Cito Ontology (https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html) inside while Process descriptions should use xmi (XML Metadata Interchange https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML_Metadata_Interchange)
What further steps are needed to be taken or discussed by/in our WG regarding this issue?