iodepo
450 generate schemaorg to prov mapping
The core PROV terms (what are referred to as Starting Point terms) are mostly covered.
I'm not convinced that adding the Expanded terms or the Qualified terms is really wise - these, especially the Qualified terms, look like PROV got carried away with itself. The semantics are either better handed by generic models like schema.org, or are convoluted. There may be a way to map via potentialActions, however.
The Expanded terms are actually reasonably mappable. But things like Collections etc are not appropriate in the PROV domain - this is mission creep on PROV's part. The same is true for Person, Organization, etc. We can still map it I suppsoe, but this is by no means a vote of confidence of such terms.
xref https://github.com/ESIPFed/science-on-schema.org/issues/211
@ashepherd I think ProvONE has the same issues of mission creep as the expanded and qualifying PROV terms. We can still map, but I think the PROV realm is reinventing things unnecessarily.
@matentzn this may be interesting to you, and a quick check of this SSSOM would be appreciated.
@pbuttigieg I fixed a few syntactic bugs. Would you like me to implement a sssom mapping registry for ODIS with mapping file validation etc?
Thanks @matentzn
What would the registry entail? We'll likely have more SSSOM files on the way, thus it sounds sensible
Here is an example:
https://github.com/mapping-commons/mh_mapping_initiative
Mappings: https://github.com/mapping-commons/mh_mapping_initiative/tree/master/mappings Registry file: https://github.com/mapping-commons/mh_mapping_initiative/blob/master/registry.yml QC checking: https://github.com/mapping-commons/mh_mapping_initiative/blob/master/.github/workflows/qc.yml
Its easy enough to set up, and I am happy to donate one to you!
Here is an example:
https://github.com/mapping-commons/mh_mapping_initiative
Mappings: https://github.com/mapping-commons/mh_mapping_initiative/tree/master/mappings Registry file: https://github.com/mapping-commons/mh_mapping_initiative/blob/master/registry.yml QC checking: https://github.com/mapping-commons/mh_mapping_initiative/blob/master/.github/workflows/qc.yml
Its easy enough to set up, and I am happy to donate one to you!
@matentzn Sounds great! I'm for it, but I'll have to clear this with the rest of the team.
I'm assuming creating and maintaining mappings in the commons is open source and at no cost?
I'm assuming creating and maintaining mappings in the commons is open source and at no cost?
100%, we can move it to your own repo if you like!
@pbuttigieg I have created a minimal mapping registry for you here for inspection:
https://github.com/matentzn/odis-mapping-commons
Here is an example of a PR introducing a breaking change so you can see how QC works:
https://github.com/matentzn/odis-mapping-commons/pull/1