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

BFO:0000050 (part_of) missing #218

Open
spficklin opened this issue Feb 28, 2018 · 9 comments
Open

BFO:0000050 (part_of) missing #218

spficklin opened this issue Feb 28, 2018 · 9 comments

Comments

@spficklin
Copy link

Hi, it seems the BFO:0000050 (part_of) term is missing in the most recent version of the BFO. However, there are a large number of vocabularies that use it. We are working on a general parser for ontologies and we are using EBI's Ontology Lookup Service API to find terms. Unfortunately this term is not in EBIs OLS. So, we're a bit stuck on what to do when a vocabulary uses it but we can't find it in the current vocabulary. We're looking for clarification. Thanks.

@zhengj2007
Copy link
Contributor

Due to debate on temporal relations, the BFO 2 only contains classes. The relations are kept in Relations ontology (RO).

The BFO:'part_of' IRI is solvable in RO:
http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/BFO_0000050

@spficklin
Copy link
Author

If the term was moved to the relationship ontology shouldn't it be renamed with an RO prefix? Our software is using the term prefix (e.g. BFO) to lookup the term and it makes it seem as though the term is still in the BFO even though it has moved.

@zhengj2007
Copy link
Contributor

I know your concern. However, BFO_0000050 has been widely used. So the ID is preserved in RO.

@spficklin
Copy link
Author

How are we supposed to know what vocabulary now owns a term? There's nothing in the current RO obo file that indicates the term belongs to the relationship ontology now: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/oborel/obo-relations/master/ro.obo

@zhengj2007
Copy link
Contributor

It is under discussion. Someone has proposed to use property 'is_defined_by' to indicate which ontology own a term.

I will bring it up to OBO Foundry group for discussion.

@spficklin
Copy link
Author

spficklin commented Mar 2, 2018

That would be helpful. Thank you. We are currently using the EBI Ontology Lookup Service to query for terms using their RESTful API. They have a flag that indicates if an ontology defines the term, but in the case of the BFO:0000050 they have no ontology listed that defines the term.

@zhengj2007
Copy link
Contributor

May contact OLS group to see whether it is possible to add that tag to term BFO:0000050. Actually RO use few relations with BFO prefix (the relations defined in BFO pre-Graz version but not in BFO official release)

@spficklin
Copy link
Author

Thanks, that would be very helpful.

@cmungall
Copy link
Contributor

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants
@cmungall @spficklin @zhengj2007 and others