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

Jump to bottom

fixed subsetdef to have it's own opaque id #23

Closed
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Mar 12, 2015 · 6 comments
Closed

fixed subsetdef to have it's own opaque id #23

GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Mar 12, 2015 · 6 comments
Labels
auto-migrated Priority-Medium Type-Defect

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link 

Skype conversation:

T(ID)?
4:40 PM
ID is not a localid
4:41 PM
subsetdef ID plant "subset for plant ontology"
4:43 PM
subsetdef ID QuotedString -> subsetdef(localuri(md5(name)) name 
Annotation(Comment String))
4:44 PM
subsetdef( ID name [annotationpro annotatioval]*)
4:44 PM
ID in abstract syntax = localuri(md5(ID)) in the OBO Flat file syntax
4:46 PM
subsetdef( unprefixed-ID name [annotationpro annotatioval]*)
4:46 PM
subsetdef( URI name [annotationpro annotatioval]*)

Original issue reported on code.google.com by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 11 May 2011 at 8:51
@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

Q: how to translate back AnnotationAssertion(subsetURI definitionSource "foo") 
-> OBO Flat

Original comment by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 11 May 2011 at 8:53

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

two possibilities: 1) overload string. 2) just use and axiomstanza

Original comment by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 11 May 2011 at 8:54

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

before doing the md5 add some salt specific to each syntactic place an 
unprefixed label can be used without ambiguity. so that we don't get the same 
URI for an id used for a subsetdef as for some other use of id.

Original comment by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 11 May 2011 at 8:56

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

not sure about this. I would rather follow the principle of least surprises, 
not introduce any additional artefacts not already present, and simply 
encourage people to use proper IDs for the subsets.

Original comment by cmung...@gmail.com on 25 Jun 2011 at 1:48

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

We have implemented the simple solution here

Original comment by cmung...@gmail.com on 15 Jul 2011 at 8:33

  • Changed state: Done

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

what is the simple solution?

Original comment by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 15 Jul 2011 at 9:06

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
auto-migrated Priority-Medium Type-Defect
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@GoogleCodeExporter