-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
First draft of FAIR Mappings schema #6
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Introduces new YAML files under tests/data/valid and tests/data/invalid to provide examples of both valid and invalid MappingSpecification objects. These files can be used for testing schema validation and error handling.
Introduces new classes (Agent, Source, MappingSpecification) and associated slots to the fair_mappings_schema.yaml.
|
Introduced AgentTypeEnum, SourceTypeEnum, and MappingSpecificationTypeEnum to define permissible values for agent, source, and mapping specification types. Updated the Agent, Source, and MappingSpecification classes to use these enums via slot_usage. Added new slots for version, type, and reviewer to relevant classes to enhance schema expressiveness.
Removed AgentTypeEnum and refactored Agent into abstract class with Person, Organization, and Software subclasses. Added new slots for agent subclasses and extended MappingTypeEnum with yarrrml and xslt options.
Replaces 'content' with 'content_url' in Source and MappingSpecification classes and updates all related YAML and test files. Adds 'metadata_url' and 'metadata_type' fields to Source for improved metadata handling.
|
|
||
| MappingSpecificationTypeEnum: | ||
| description: Types of mapping specifications | ||
| permissible_values: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should add "shacl-rules" to the enum.
| - linkml:types | ||
|
|
||
| enums: | ||
| SourceTypeEnum: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we should either have specific definition languages (e.g. owl, skos etc) in all of the values or none of them. I would prefer this be a high level type i.e. ontology, database, vocabulary etc. We should another field for the specific definition language (or representation technique as ADMS puts it)
No description provided.