EWG action: review auto-validation for Principle #7 Relations

[nataled]

[cstoeckert]

P7 - automated check looks at labels, not meanings. Req: Checks that relations are from RO in an OBO ontology. Review/changes needed: If the relation is not from RO, the check makes sure that there is no label clash but there is no way for it to make sure there is no meaning clash. This would probably require some manual review to determine if the two terms are identical and if the ontology should be using the RO relation instead.

[nataled]

Related issue: https://github.com/OBOFoundry/OBOFoundry.github.io/issues/981

[cstoeckert]

The principle and validation are both addressing the use of RO properties. Both say relations should be reused from the Relations Ontology (RO) and MUST reuse existing RO relations than rather than duplicate them. The exact wording could be improved between them for clarity. What is missing is a "Criteria for Review" section at the bottom of the principle page. This should be added by the EWG.

The automated check just compares to RO. In #981 comparison of labels to non-RO relations is raised and this could be discussed as a criteria with the Operations Committee.

The principle also requires that a "new relation MUST be asserted to be a sub-property of the RO relation" when there is a RO relation that is logically a super-property. This is not currently checked; warnings or info tags could be given to non-RO relations that don't have a RO super-property.