Tommy Yu wrote:
> David Nickerson wrote:
>>> Actually they are.  Keywords are defined in the CellML metadata 
>>> specifications and are already being used in various files.  Feel free to 
>>> check the CellML files of the old repository and scroll down the to keyword 
>>> section.  An example follows.
>>>
>>> >From http://www.cellml.org/examples/models/beeler_reuter_model_1977.html:
>>>
>>>       <!--  Keyword(s) -->
>>>       <bqs:reference rdf:parseType="Resource">
>>>         <dc:subject rdf:parseType="Resource">
>>>           <bqs:subject_type>keyword</bqs:subject_type>
>>>           <rdf:value>
>>>             <rdf:Bag>
>>>               <rdf:li>ventricular myocyte</rdf:li>
>>>               <rdf:li>electrophysiological</rdf:li>
>>>             </rdf:Bag>
>>>           </rdf:value>
>>>         </dc:subject>
>>>       </bqs:reference>
>>>
>>> I do understand it may be different from the full CellML metadata 
>>> specification as found in 
>>> http://www.cellml.org/specifications/metadata/cellml_metadata_1.0#sec_bqs, 
>>> but all other models pretty much follow this RDF format and so I wound up 
>>> having to follow the above format to pick up the keyword metadata.
>>>     
>> does this mean that keywords described using the RDF specified in the 
>> CellML Metadata Specification will not be picked up? or is the above 
>> allowed in addition to following the specification? And are there any 
>> plans to standardise on one or the other of these?
>>
>>   
> I believe as per the metadata specification status, it is only a draft. 
> I did not develop the specifications and I did not coded the model, and 
> since the current usage is not following the specification I have not 
> much of a choice and so I did not follow the draft specification.  I can 
> of course make adjustment to the keyword code.  As for standardization 
> of the keyword metadata, I am not the best person to answer that.

I'd suggest that since you are deciding how keywords are extracted, 
edited, and put back into the models that you are the best person to 
answer that. Otherwise there should have been some discussion on this 
mailing list as to how to handle this issue.


David.
_______________________________________________
cellml-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion

Reply via email to