ols4
ols4 copied to clipboard
BFO:0000050
When I search for BFO:0000050 I get this
it's defined by RO but RO is nowhere to be seen. This is because it's defined by RO but uses the BFO prefix.
(maybe related, short form or name is truncated)
It is not immediately clear how to address this without causing a lot of noise for various ontologies since many of our ontologies do not use owl:imports.
Is there no rdfs:isDefinedBy property for these terms in RO? If not, I can request it
No, not for BFO_0000050. For BFO_0000054, BFO_0000066 and BFO_0000067 it has <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/bfo.owl"/> and for BFO_0000055 it has <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/iao.owl"/>
It will be helpful in RO for BFO terms that are intended to be defined in RO to have <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ro.owl"/>. Currently we assume IsDefiningOntology=true only when prefix of ontology matches prefix of term. Then we can extend this to consider rdfs:isDefinedBy.
We do consider rdfs:isDefinedBy I think
We are using the wrong predicate. This should be changed to isDefinedBy rather than definedBy:
https://github.com/EBISPOT/ols4/blob/dev/dataload/linker/src/main/java/LinkerPass1.java#L238C34-L238C34
@udp should we just change that line? Will there be any dependencies we need to be aware of and check?