You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 12, 2019. It is now read-only.
Currently we have been making notes as rdfs:comments but we should do this in a better way
If we believe they are truly equivalent then equivalentClasses is appropriate - however, this is a pain to work with in protege (since you induce a class declaration). I would vote for editing as a skos:exactMatch (we can avoid declaring a class). It could be converted to equivalence during release
For close matches, skos:closeMatch, otherwise rdfs:seeAlso?
Or we could make our own vocabulary for this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
(b) external resources [sio,wikidata,biotop,mesh,...]
See beckyjackson#1beckyjackson#2
Still to do OBOFoundry#14 UMLS
I also include an import in manual-core that brings in the matches;
we indicate these as skos annotations to avoid 'polluting' core
note a bug in the owlapi means we lose some axiom annotations on these.
Currently we have been making notes as rdfs:comments but we should do this in a better way
If we believe they are truly equivalent then equivalentClasses is appropriate - however, this is a pain to work with in protege (since you induce a class declaration). I would vote for editing as a skos:exactMatch (we can avoid declaring a class). It could be converted to equivalence during release
For close matches, skos:closeMatch, otherwise rdfs:seeAlso?
Or we could make our own vocabulary for this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: