Add mapping capabilities #34

pablo-de-andres · 2022-07-06T15:38:56Z

No description provided.

pablo-de-andres · 2022-07-06T15:39:40Z

@csadorf I would say it is now ready for you to review/extend it :)

pablo-de-andres · 2022-07-07T07:19:35Z

I won't push any more to avoid conflicts, but I just thought we might want to make clearer that the mapping name will be used as an id.

yoavnash

@pablo-de-andres, could you provide examples for the responses of listMappings and getMapping?

pablo-de-andres · 2022-07-08T07:52:46Z

Based on the SimPARTIX example:

listMappings a list of the included mapping schema names/ids:

["SimpartixOutput", "SomeOtherSchema"]

getMapping/<SimpartixOutput> returns one specific mapping schema:

{
        "name": "SimpartixOutput",
        "type": "dlite",
        "properties": {
            "temperature": "http://emmo.info/emmo#EMMO_affe07e4_e9bc_4852_86c6_69e26182a17f",
            "group": "http://emmo.info/emmo#EMMO_0cd58641_824c_4851_907f_f4c3be76630c",
            "state_of_matter": "http://emmo.info/emmo#EMMO_b9695e87_8261_412e_83cd_a86459426a28",
        }
}

yoavnash · 2022-07-08T08:03:10Z

Some questions:

What is the meaning of the mapping names? Can a machine know that they are associated to other capabilities or are they just meant for humans as a description?
Why are the mappings associated with a specific schema? Why aren't they global for the entire app?
Why does the type mention DLite? Do the mappings depend on a specific tool? (I believe they shouldn't)
It may be that an app provider would like to map a term to multiple ontology concepts (as alternatives). It seems not to be possible at the moment. Could we add a way to support it?
For the case of EMMO, how can a human get the labels of the classes in an easy way? (it may defeat the purpose if not possible)

pablo-de-andres · 2022-07-08T08:11:20Z

What is the meaning of the mapping names? Can a machine know that they are associated to other capabilities or are they just meant for humans as a description?

The name is what the response header will use to identify which mapping should be used for the data being sent.

Why are the mapping associated with a specific schema? Why aren't they global for the entire app?

To allow some flexibility/modularity. Could be that the app returns different kinds of data and/or schemas (dlite, cuds, sth else). So you will be told which one applies to the data you received.

Why does the type mention DLite? Are the mappings depend on a specific tool? (I believe they shouldn't)

I thought this could be useful for the person to know how to interpret the rest of the fields. For example, knowing it is dlite I will know that the mappings apply to the objects inside the properties key

It may be that an app provider would like to map a term to multiple ontology concepts (as alternatives). It seems not to be possible at the moment.

You can always return a list as the value:

"temperature": ["IRI1", "IRI2"]

For the case of EMMO, how can a human get the labels of the classes in an easy way? (it may defeat the purpose if not possible)

I assume browsing the ontology -> Look for IRI -> read label. But if this is not very user friendly I would say the responsibility lays more in the ontology side (e.g. FOAF has human readable IRIs)

pablo-de-andres · 2022-07-08T08:18:07Z

Thinking about it, the type of the schema (dlite, ...) could also be best sent as part of the response header (with the data), to keep the mapping cleaner. But I think it should be somewhere.

yoavnash · 2022-07-08T12:23:21Z

marketplace_standard_app_api/routers/object_storage.py

+
+@router.get(
+    "/mappings/{mapping_id}",
+    operation_id="getMapping",


Suggestion: getSemanticMapping

Same as above, endpoint name and operation id should be consistent.

See here: #34 (comment)

This would potentially need to be changed to /semanticMappings/{semantic_mapping_id} and getSemanticMapping.

yoavnash · 2022-07-08T12:24:16Z

marketplace_standard_app_api/routers/object_storage.py

+
+@router.get(
+    "/mappings",
+    operation_id="listMappings",


Suggestion: getSemanticMappingIds

By looking at the other capabilities, it seems listSemanticMappings would be more consistent, and that's also ok for me, although I do think getSemanticMappingIds is somewhat more descriptive.

I think we should keep the route and the operation id somewhat consistent so unless we switch this to /semantic-mappings, I'd recommend to stick to the current implementation.

Makes sense. In that case I'd personally go with /semantic-mappings.

Minor remark: on the global search route we use camelcase (/globalSearch). I'd encourage following only one style.

I would personally prefer to stick to mappings instead of semanticMappings, but, agreed, if we decide to change it then the endpoint should be /semanticMappings and the operationId should be listSemanticMappings.

@pablo-de-andres Do you want to break the tie?

After an offline discussion with Yoav, I see how the semantic prefix brings some extra information which might be worth the extra characters. I would go with that one.

pablo-de-andres · 2022-07-08T12:28:32Z

Summary of the off-line discussion:

The mapping names are just identifiers, useful when different mappings are applicable to different scenarios.
The type of the schema (dlite, cuds...) should not be part of the mapping, but rather of the headers sent with the data itself.
There is no real need to explicitly indicate the ontology, as there could be different ones being used. If needed, inspect the IRIs.
For multiple mapping possibilities, multiple groups should be used. These can then be explicitly listed in the header with the data.
Labels are not necessarily as unique or permanent as IRIs, so they will not be included.

Bonus:

How does versioning of ontologies affect IRIs?

pablo-de-andres · 2022-07-19T07:01:53Z

What is the status of this? Any support needed?

csadorf · 2022-07-19T12:24:54Z

What is the status of this? Any support needed?

No, I simply had not had the chance to work on this yet.

csadorf

@pablo-de-andres I think this is actually more or less done. I just have a few quick questions.

marketplace_standard_app_api/models/object_storage.py

csadorf · 2022-07-21T08:48:25Z

@yoavnash @pablo-de-andres I have commented on the outstanding question regarding the endpoint and operationId names. I don't feel strongly either way so I suggest that the two of you make a decision and then we can move on.

Add mappings capabilities

7f4f463

pablo-de-andres linked an issue Jul 6, 2022 that may be closed by this pull request

New capability for mappings to semantic entities #33

Closed

pablo-de-andres marked this pull request as draft July 6, 2022 15:39

csadorf self-assigned this Jul 6, 2022

yoavnash reviewed Jul 8, 2022

View reviewed changes

csadorf reviewed Jul 19, 2022

View reviewed changes

marketplace_standard_app_api/models/object_storage.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

marketplace_standard_app_api/models/object_storage.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

remove MappingModel.type & MappingName.max_lenght

b5cf00d

change mappings to semanticMappings

59ee481

csadorf marked this pull request as ready for review July 25, 2022 07:19

csadorf approved these changes Jul 25, 2022

View reviewed changes

pablo-de-andres merged commit b5d2f64 into main Aug 1, 2022

pablo-de-andres deleted the capability-for-semantic-mappings branch August 1, 2022 13:05

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add mapping capabilities #34

Add mapping capabilities #34

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 6, 2022

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 6, 2022 •

edited

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 7, 2022

yoavnash left a comment

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 8, 2022

yoavnash commented Jul 8, 2022 •

edited

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 8, 2022 •

edited

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 8, 2022

yoavnash Jul 8, 2022

csadorf Jul 19, 2022

yoavnash Jul 20, 2022

csadorf Jul 21, 2022

yoavnash Jul 8, 2022 •

edited

yoavnash Jul 8, 2022 •

edited

csadorf Jul 19, 2022

yoavnash Jul 20, 2022

pablo-de-andres Jul 20, 2022

csadorf Jul 21, 2022

pablo-de-andres Jul 22, 2022

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 8, 2022 •

edited

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 19, 2022

csadorf commented Jul 19, 2022

csadorf left a comment

csadorf commented Jul 21, 2022

Add mapping capabilities #34

Add mapping capabilities #34

Conversation

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 6, 2022

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 6, 2022 • edited

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 7, 2022

yoavnash left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 8, 2022

yoavnash commented Jul 8, 2022 • edited

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 8, 2022 • edited

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 8, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

yoavnash Jul 8, 2022 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

yoavnash Jul 8, 2022 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 8, 2022 • edited

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 19, 2022

csadorf commented Jul 19, 2022

csadorf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

csadorf commented Jul 21, 2022

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 6, 2022 •

edited

yoavnash commented Jul 8, 2022 •

edited

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 8, 2022 •

edited

yoavnash Jul 8, 2022 •

edited

yoavnash Jul 8, 2022 •

edited

pablo-de-andres commented Jul 8, 2022 •

edited