search

openrif / vivo-isf-ontology

The "VIVO-ISF Ontology" is an OWL2 representation of the VIVO-ISF Data Standard
16 stars 9 forks source link

vcard:Title #747

Open tawahle opened 6 years ago

tawahle commented 6 years ago

When creating a preferred label (via the same-named faux property) some Vcard classes are used, which can be found neither in the latest nor in the older Vcard specification. These classes are: vcard:Organizational and vcard:Title.

tawahle commented 6 years ago

Another sub-classes of vcard:Organizational as vcard:Logo, vcard:Related, vcard:OrganizationName are also not specified as classes in the Vcard specification.

mjaved495 commented 6 years ago

@tawahle There are also a number of other entities that are obsolete from other ontologies. We will handle these obsolete entities once we have a single vivo ontology file.

mconlon17 commented 6 years ago

Yes. There should be tickets like this one to make changes to the ontology. That way, we have a record of what we found and what we did.

tawahle commented 6 years ago

@mjaved495 I'm not sure, if these Vcard entities are obsolet. However, in the latest version of the Vcard ontology they are specified in a completely different way. I think, all the Vcard entities used in VIVO should be checked, since there is also a number of properties which has been changed in the specification, like e.g. http://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns#honorificPrefix in VIVO and http://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns#honorific-prefix in Vcard specification.

tawahle commented 6 years ago

@mconlon17 Thank you, Mike!

mconlon17 commented 6 years ago

What is being proposed by this issue? That we add properties? Remove them?

tawahle commented 6 years ago

I've detected the above mentioned disparities and proposed changes on the Vcard in VIVO in line with the current version of Vcard spek were proposed. The vivo.owl and the Vcard part in it have actually been aligned with the current Vcard spec during the first VIVO ontology sprint. The question is what are the further steps to implement these changes ... But it was supposed to be a task for a next sprint.