Closed gaurav closed 5 years ago
Well, if we want provenance, then we should discuss what to stick the provenance on. It's quite awkward to stick assertions (or annotations) on a property (because then properties become the subject). So perhaps this should be a class instead, and then we can use prov:wasGeneratedBy
, prov:wasDerivedFrom
and prov:wasAttributedTo
to track who or what process posited the resolution.
In the revised Phyloref model proposed in #29, this is to be expressed with the following pattern:
rdf:type (obi:is_specified_output_of some
(obi:prediction and (obi:has_specified_input some <Phyloreference>))
where <Phyloreference>
is the class for which the node instance is expected as the resolution.
In an example:
# Individual: :CLADO_00000062_node22 (Alligatoridae)
ClassAssertion(
ObjectSomeValuesFrom(
obo:OBI_0000312 ObjectIntersectionOf(
obo:OBI_0302910 ObjectSomeValuesFrom(obo:OBI_0000293 :CLADO_00000010)))
:CLADO_00000062_node22)
Sounds good! This will be implemented in phyloref/phyx.js#4.
Proposed term:
has_expected_resolution
Definition: Identifies the Node that a particular phyloreference is expected to resolve to. Additional assertations may be used to clarify who has asserted this and what evidence they used. Domain: Phyloreference (phyloref:Phyloreference
) Range: Node (obo:CDAO_0000140
)Competency questions:
We currently use text-based labels for this, but plan to replace them with IRIs (phyloref/curation-tool#65).