Experimental OWL version of WRROC #69
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Ontology also editable in https://webprotege.stanford.edu/#projects/08bcccf2-8ac3-4438-835d-f5ec104c197d/edit/Classes I added the roterms as separate Turtle file, but there only using schema.org style rdfs schema. For owl you need the union classes etc for domain/range as in this owl file so the roterms are redefined there. |
|
need: a way to test the reasoner with each of our example crates after converting them from json-ld to owl |
|
Agreed in call 2024-05-21 and on Slack that we won't need the ontology as #73 included a rdfs vocabulary. |
|
Suggest we close this as the ontology does kind of work, but the OWL reasoners don't so it may not really be that helpful. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As part of creating the SKOS mapping for https://w3id.org/ro/doi/10.5281/zenodo.10368989 (see https://github.com/ResearchObject/workflow-run-crate-paper/tree/main/docs/mapping) I tried making an OWL ontology to better help the SSSOM mapping for some PROV edge cases as well as to avoid mapping on any non-process actions that happen to be in the crate.
I ended up formalizing types like
ProcessRunCrateProfileandProcessRunAction-- these may be useful also for doing RDF Shapes with SHACL which is quite type-centric. As we in RO-Crate don't easily invent new subtypes these are equivalence classes in their own namespace which should not be declared in@type-- this ontology is thus more of an execution tool than vocabulary definitions of WRROC.I will leave this PR as a draft as this was a bit tricky to do consistently and it will need its own unit tests. It's also incomplete in that I only started with the process crate, but leave it here for interested readers.
It's also quite convoluted to climb up from the profile to the crate to the crate's content. That's why many additional equivalence classes etc. are added.