Skip to content
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

Would adding a dcterms:created triple to the import modules & release artefacts make sense? #1188

Open
StroemPhi opened this issue Feb 21, 2025 · 0 comments
Labels
enhancement needs discussion Discussion, specification, or clarification required to proceed

Comments

@StroemPhi
Copy link
Contributor

Currently, ODK assumes a workflow where the versioning is using dates instead of SemVer, as the OBO community uses a date based versioning scheme.
If ODK is used by someone outside of the OBO community and would like to rather use SemVer or some other versioning scheme, the VERSION variable given in the Makefile would have to be overwritten in the custom Makefile. To be able to indicate the release date of the import modules and the release artefacts an additional dcterms:created triple should then be provided as a best practice. This can be done by overwriting the ANNOTATE_ONTOLOGY_VERSION variable in ones custom.Makefile with: annotate -V $(ONTBASE)/releases/$(VERSION)/$@ --annotation owl:versionInfo $(VERSION) --annotation dcterms:created $(TODAY).

Now, I'm wondering if it would make sense to also add this dcterms:created triple to the standard ODK Makefile, to make the creation date semantically more explicit, although it is implicitly already provided in the owl:versionInfo triple in the standard ODK setup. I don't think there is an immidiate need for this, but indexing/look-up services, like OLS or Bioportal, might have a use case to utilize this triple.

@StroemPhi StroemPhi added enhancement needs discussion Discussion, specification, or clarification required to proceed labels Feb 21, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement needs discussion Discussion, specification, or clarification required to proceed
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant