Darren A. Natale

--corrected labels and assignee-- Your question is one that is not fully settled, so far as I know. I'm therefore going to make sure this is discussed at the next...

@schaferw here is the outcome of the meeting and the current status. During the call the options presented above were discussed. The general consensus is (1) Option 2 is more...

@matentzn many ontologies have been deprecated without replacement, that's just the way of it sometimes. Terms that are needed from a deprecated ontology are typically rescued, I suppose, by those...

Issues To Be Addressed (partial list): 1) Would like a metadata tag in the ontology itself for this. TBD. 2) Possible need for controlled vocabulary for scope/domain (for example: Anatomy,...

Please note that this issue is focused on the wording of the Scope principle. The ensuing discussion is more related to the call for categorization mentioned in issues #19 and...

No. Only the off-topic part was moved to another ticket.

Clarification: the principle states that versions be either of date format (specifically YYYY-MM-DD) OR use version number (such as NN.n), but that the IRIs for each version be a dated...

EWG note: There have indeed been reviews since 2016, publicly available from the Foundry website (http://www.obofoundry.org/docs/CompletedReviews.html), though it seems the newest are not shown.

Strictly speaking, Foundry designation has one real purpose: to indicate which of the (possibly several) ontologies in a given domain should be the point of 'convergence' (that is, reference and...

My proposal addresses how it looks to the outside world AND maintains one of the key reasons why the Foundry exists: "By joining the initiative, the authors of an ontology...