Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

NEO term URIs are different from Golr #17

Open
balhoff opened this issue Mar 13, 2017 · 10 comments
Open

NEO term URIs are different from Golr #17

balhoff opened this issue Mar 13, 2017 · 10 comments
Assignees

Comments

@balhoff
Copy link
Member

balhoff commented Mar 13, 2017

In NEO, terms use OBO PURLs like http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MGI_MGI%3A1336172, but the autocomplete in Noctua produces terms like http://www.informatics.jax.org/accession/MGI:MGI:1336172 (which I assume comes from Golr). This is a problem for using NEO to get taxon metadata or to query models for instances of molecular entity.

@cmungall
Copy link
Member

cmungall commented May 3, 2017

cc @kltm

Almost. Golr doesn't care much what goes in the id field. Currently the OWLTools loader will contract to OBO-style IDs (using a needs-to-die OWLTools-Core method), producing IDs like MGI:MGI:1336172 .

These get passed on Minerva, which expands them using it's CURIE map, giving the jax URL. But the URI in Minerva's TBox comes from Neo.

ugh

@cmungall
Copy link
Member

cmungall commented May 3, 2017

OK, I think the correct fix is to adapt the OWLTools-core golr loader to use a prefixmap, but this is a bit of work.

A workaround is to make minerva aggressively defensive, distrust and rewrite its own TBox. Ugh.

@balhoff
Copy link
Member Author

balhoff commented Jun 9, 2017

Does your comment mean that it is correct for these terms to use the OBO prefix within NEO?

@cmungall
Copy link
Member

Once @yy20716 implements this: owlcollab/owltools#245

I will have neo export the same URIs that are used by minerva

@cmungall
Copy link
Member

Hmm, it looks like
https://build.berkeleybop.org/job/build-noctua-entity-ontology/

is configured to take from any branch not master, which means my PR has already leaked out

   <!-- http://identifiers.org/flybase/FBgn0000003 -->

    <owl:Class rdf:about="http://identifiers.org/flybase/FBgn0000003">
        <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CHEBI_33695"/>
        <rdfs:subClassOf>
            <owl:Restriction>
                <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/RO_0002162"/>
                <owl:someValuesFrom rdf:resource="http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/NCBITaxon_7227"/>
            </owl:Restriction>
        </rdfs:subClassOf>
        <oboInOwl:hasBroadSynonym rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string">7SLRNACR32864</oboInOwl:hasBroadSynonym>
        <oboInOwl:hasExactSynonym rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string">Signal recognition particle 7SL RNA CR32864 Dmel</oboInOwl:hasExactSynonym>
        <oboInOwl:id rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string">FB:FBgn0000003</oboInOwl:id>
        <rdfs:label rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string">7SLRNACR32864 Dmel</rdfs:label>
    </owl:Class>

We need to make sure that the latest owltools (one that incorporates owlcollab/owltools#247) is used to load solr

in this job:
https://build.berkeleybop.org/job/load-golr-noctua-neo

it seems this job failed for a different reason.

@kltm
Copy link
Member

kltm commented Apr 25, 2018

@cmungall I believe I've cleared the "different reason" on that machine.

@balhoff
Copy link
Member Author

balhoff commented May 22, 2018

I'm seeing updated identifiers in NEO now. In particular, I notice identifiers.org for MGI and ZFIN. But, a couple of questions:

  1. MGI IDs look like this: http://identifiers.org/mgi/MGI%3A99582. Should they instead be http://identifiers.org/mgi/MGI:99582? As far as I know the colon doesn't need to be encoded. Although it resolves to the same place, it's not the same identifier.
  2. I seem some OBO-style ComplexPortal IDs: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ComplexPortal_CPX-1. Is that correct?

@cmungall
Copy link
Member

cmungall commented May 22, 2018 via email

@goodb
Copy link

goodb commented Jul 23, 2020

Noting that above comment on complex portal has not been resolved yet.
Minerva seems to think that
ComplexPortal:CPX-998 means https://www.ebi.ac.uk/complexportal/complex/CPX-9
but NEO seems to think that it means
http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ComplexPortal_CPX-998

@cmungall
Copy link
Member

cmungall commented Jul 23, 2020 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants