[dwc-mixs] DwC "picklist" extension to MIxS IRIs

Thu Jun 24 16:24:35 UTC 2021

Thanks Ramona

> would it help if we assigned URIs to the values in the CVs? That is our eventual plan

Yes, longer term this makes sense. I anticipate we’ll probably arrive at SKOS or similar for these kind of vocabularies.

> …it is less confusing to use the GBIF namespace for URNs

Thanks. We’ll change to use GBIF namespaces unless someone brings new information and will update the TG report accordingly.

Best wishes,
Tim

From: Ramona Walls <rlwalls2008 at gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, 24 June 2021 at 18.18
To: Tim Robertson <trobertson at gbif.org>
Cc: Pier Luigi Buttigieg <pier.buttigieg at awi.de>, "dwc-mixs at lists.tdwg.org" <dwc-mixs at lists.tdwg.org>, Chris Mungall <cjmungall at lbl.gov>, Bill Duncan <wdduncan at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [dwc-mixs] DwC "picklist" extension to MIxS IRIs

Thank you both for working this out and explaining the details.

I do think it is less confusing to use the GBIF namespace for URNs, rather than append the GSC URIs. Citing the MIxS URI then allows people to find the original term.

Tim, would it help if we assigned URIs to the values in the CVs? That is our eventual plan.

Ramona

------------------------------------------------------
Ramona L. Walls, Ph.D.
Data Scientist, Ontologies, Semantics, and Metadata, Critical Path Institute
Assistant Research Professor, Bio5 Institute, University of Arizona
Part-time artist (https://www.instagram.com/omnivoresgratitutude/)

On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 12:21 PM Tim Robertson <trobertson at gbif.org<mailto:trobertson at gbif.org>> wrote:
Thanks, Pier

We'll clearly state expectations in the description, and this will be kept as internal as it can be.

Using the example of the vocabulary of controlled terms for lib_layout[1] currently we have:
  https://w3id.org/gensc/terms/MIXS:0000041/vector

This could become something like the following e.g.
   https://rs.gbif.org/vocab/dna/lib_layout/vector

Would this be preferable to the GSC folk to avoid confusion, please?
Note that the source from where it is derived will still be cited.

Thanks,
Tim

[1] https://rs.gbif.org/sandbox/vocabulary/mixs/lib_layout.xml

On 22/06/2021, 17.41, "Pier Luigi Buttigieg" <pier.buttigieg at awi.de<mailto:pier.buttigieg at awi.de>> wrote:

    Thanks Tim, this clarifies a great deal.

    Measures to make it clear that the URNs (wherever they appear, e.g. on
    documentation pages, lists...) used by legacy systems are not to be
    understood as resolvable or under the control/custodianship of the GSC
    would help.

    While technically valid, prefixing URNs with HTTP does indeed set a
    false expectation - anything that can mitigate that would be appreciated.

    On the GSC and TDWG side however, it would be very interesting to find
    out how to do this more sustainably by, e.g., sharing vocabulary files
    with all the metadata needed to, e.g., map to ontologies, qualify terms
    with comments, include provenance data, etc

    On 22/06/2021 17:18, Tim Robertson wrote:
    > Thanks, Pier
    >
    > Just for a bit of background - you're assuming these are IRIs, but the DwC-A work was all designed at a time when URNs were common and expectations of resolvability weren't as high as today.
    > The original design was really just to ensure a globally unique URN was used.
    >
    > I think the concerns you raise are valid, and especially with the current intent to achieve resolvability for all the w3id.org/.<http://w3id.org/>.. terms.
    > We do need a URN though, and I understand there isn't an intention to make resolvable terms for these concepts. The rs.gbif.org<http://rs.gbif.org> namespace has been used for this kind of thing in the past, which might be an alternative option to lower expectations.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Tim
    >
    >
    >
    > On 22/06/2021, 16.02, "dwc-mixs on behalf of Pier Luigi Buttigieg" <dwc-mixs-bounces at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:dwc-mixs-bounces at lists.tdwg.org> on behalf of pier.buttigieg at awi.de<mailto:pier.buttigieg at awi.de>> wrote:
    >
    >      Dear TG, Dear Ramona (GSC CIG), Chris, Bill,
    >
    >      In our DwC-MIxS mapping activity, we noted a practice to support the IPT
    >      to generate "picklists" (for drop-down menus etc) by adding extensions
    >      to IRIs.
    >
    >      This was suggested as a means to link the values to keys in
    >      terminology-focused fields.
    >
    >      You can see the link to the "picklists" in the tracker:
    >      https://github.com/tdwg/gbwg/tree/main/dwc-mixs/dwc#vocabularies
    >
    >      An example is available in [1] and looks like:
    >      dc:URI='https://w3id.org/gensc/terms/MIXS:0000005/contigs'
    >
    >      I'm not quite sure about this and would like your input. To me, it seems
    >      like a very strange way to modify an identifier *issued by another
    >      standards group* in order to help a tool generate dropdown menu.
    >
    >      It essential creates a false impression that there's something
    >      standardised on the other end of that IRI that may or may not be the case.
    >
    >      Best,
    >
    >      Pier Luigi
    >
    >      [1]
    >      https://github.com/tdwg/gbwg/blob/main/dwc-mixs/dwc/vocabulary/contam_screen_input.xml
    >
    >
    >      --
    >      https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4366-3088
    >
    >      _______________________________________________
    >      dwc-mixs mailing list
    >      dwc-mixs at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:dwc-mixs at lists.tdwg.org>
    >      http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/dwc-mixs
    >
    --
    https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4366-3088

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/dwc-mixs/attachments/20210624/40a69425/attachment-0001.html>