Closed HLWeil closed 2 months ago
The missing mapping to ISA terms is a good catch indeed. Maybe it makes sense to add the corresponding ISA term to the property description whenever possible. What do you think, @stuzart?
Regarding the PubMedID and DOI, this is something that the ARC handles in comments, right? They are not part of ISA, as far as I can see. I like the solution via the identifier field, but should it be part of the profile?
Regarding the last bullet point, I think this needs to be specified. I don't know what you mean by that, @HLWeil.
Regarding the PubMedID and DOI, this is something that the ARC handles in comments, right? They are not part of ISA, as far as I can see. I like the solution via the identifier field, but should it be part of the profile?
No, these are actually part of the ISA-Model (e.g. see here). So we would just use Identifier
and describe the intended usage in the profile?
I think it would be OK to use identifier
in these cases for DOI or Pubmed. It could either be a URL, but if it needs to give more info about the category then it can also be a PropertyMap
. The JSONLD example on schema.org shows
"identifier": {
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"propertyID": "OCoLC",
"value": "889647468"
},
so I think this could be used if needed, but generally I think just URL would be fine.
Agreed, I think the profile and our tools should allow both options.
@stuzart Do you agree to add the mapped ISA terms to the descriptions?
@floWetzels, you mean mention what ISA-Json properties are covered by which Schema.org profiles?
IMO we really need this somewhere. Alternatively, we could create a mapping table like the one for MIAPPE?
Agreed, I think the profile and our tools should allow both options.
I disagree with this, I think we should decide on one option to reduce strain and error-proneness of parsers. Especially sameAs
is a bit of an arbitrary mapping.
Although I must say that 'URL' does also make intuitive sense. But then would we also use it generically like identifier
or would it mean one specific online resource type like a DOI
?
@floWetzels @stuzart
Agreed, I think the profile and our tools should allow both options.
I disagree with this, I think we should decide on one option to reduce strain and error-proneness of parsers. Especially
sameAs
is a bit of an arbitrary mapping.Although I must say that 'URL' does also make intuitive sense. But then would we also use it generically like
identifier
or would it mean one specific online resource type like aDOI
?
What do you mean by sameAs
? It was never mentioned before.
I think @stuzart and I agreed on using identifier
for things like DOIs, ORCIDs, PubMedIDs, etc. What we meant by allowing both options is that you can either use a simple URL in the identifier
property (which is perfectly valid for DOIs or ORCIDs, don't know how PubMedIDs work) or a PropertyValue, which encodes the type of ID and a number/key.
In my opinion, this is a very reasonable use case and we should allow it, but I might be overlooking something.
The sameAs
was already part of the profile prior to this PR. It was used to denote the PubmedID, I think. Therefore it should be thrown out if we switch to the identifier
approach.
What we meant by allowing both options is that you can either use a simple URL in the
identifier
property (which is perfectly valid for DOIs or ORCIDs, don't know how PubMedIDs work) or a PropertyValue, which encodes the type of ID and a number/key. In my opinion, this is a very reasonable use case and we should allow it, but I might be overlooking something.
Oh okay I see, yeah that definitely makes sense.
I will close this issue now, as the remaining mapping documentation has its own issue now: https://github.com/nfdi4plants/isa-ro-crate-profile/issues/20
Maybe a possible solution might be to use the
Identifier
field and use PropertyValues to create combinations of a context for describing what kind of resource is being referenced and the actual reference. E.g.