Open StroemPhi opened 1 year ago
I would be happy to harmonize the identifier class and use IAO (I knew, as stated in #4, that this would be an ongoing process for us). If there is a clear solution to the OBI ticket mentioned above, and recommendation as to how to use this, I would be happy to make changes to t4fs, as I admit that some guidance here would be most welcome!
t4fs was created as part of a bottom-up process where a series of workshops identified those terms that were needed for our use cases. Naturally, this has meant later and ongoing alignment with ULOs.
Currently there is T4FS:identifier which to me seems equivalent with IAO:identifier. For some of its children there are also existing equivalents in other OBO ontologies. As I've written in https://github.com/obi-ontology/obi/issues/1624, I think we need to get such identifier modeling/harmonization issues sorted on a more grander, community wide level.