-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
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
Standardize _creator field #48
Comments
Another candidate vocabulary would be SoftwareApplication. This is also the vocabulary suggested in https://www.researchobject.org/ro-crate/1.0/#provenance-software-used-to-create-files. The example above could be translated into:
Trying also to include the discussion around additional software information in #76 (comment), softwareAddon would be an option
|
Generally looks interesting, but we'll need to figure out where it's attached. Only at the top level? (Do we have a standard structure there?) For each multiscale in case they are generated by different software. etc. |
#48 (comment) is a use case where there is a one-to-one mapping between the software and the specification i.e.
So although it could be at the top-level, there is a case for defining it (or including a reference via For more granular provenance i.e. each dataset being generated by different software, maybe we want to allow {
"multiscales":[
{
"version":"0.2",
"name":"example",
"datasets":[
{
"path":"0",
"metadata":{
"@context":"https://schema.org",
"@type":"SoftwareApplication",
"name":"bioformat2raw",
"version":"0.3.0"
}
},
{
"path":"1",
"metadata":{
"@context":"https://schema.org",
"@type":"SoftwareApplication",
"name":"mydownsampler",
"version":"0.1.0"
}
}
]
}
]
} |
Currently,
is added on export. We may want to slightly update this to match with a vocabulary like Dublin Core or W3C PROV.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: