Closed pzaborowski closed 1 year ago
@rob-metalinkage I'll do it myself, but please help me to identify where is the portal connection configuration we can use.
I've done some refactoring of the workflows so that:
Instead of using the title or abbv for the working groups, I've opted for the numeric id in the JSON source file, since Greg confirmed that it's stable (while the other values could be subject to changes, e.g., when fixing typos).
The JSON-LD uplift process for the working groups also detects SWG's and DWG's (by looking for those words on the name of the group). It adds the standard stuff (type skos:Concept, skos:inScheme), too. Of course, this can be improved.
I'm now working on another workflow to periodically download and parse the Document to SWG Google Spreadsheet and generate an incubation/working-groups/docs.ttl
with the matches in the form <Doc URI> prov:wasAttributedTo <Body URI>
.
Once this is all working we can include it in the docs domain configuration (e.g. as extra ontologies).
This is now operational - and a simplified spreadsheet to support the mapping of SWGs to docs is now available.
Currently a manual git action is used to sync this to the staging server, we will review these updates before committing to production.
I'd like to collect all the Working Groups from the portal to generate entities/bodies. The plan is to generate URIs based on the title (lowercase, without white and special signs).