On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Jim McCusker
<jmccus...@5amsolutions.com> wrote:
> I would suggest using as much as possible from PROV, especially since other
> workflow engines (Taverna and Pegasus come to mind) already support it.
> Rather than looking for bibtex mappings in XML, we should be looking for
> vocabularies that represent the elements we need to represent, and the
> relevant bibtex should be generated from that. PROV and Dublin Core Terms
> can get us most of the way there, I think.
> Jim

This PROV ontology? http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/

It looks potentially relevant, but tackling a wider issue.
Are you aware of specific examples covering tool
citation within the context of workflow provenance?
I think many people (myself included) would find that
useful - a basic example for what might go into a
Galaxy Tool's XML file?

Maybe we need to CC some semantic web folk to advise...
or schedule a get together as a BoF at GCC2014? It
seems once a format is agreed, there is willingness
on the Galaxy side to start coding :)

Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client.  To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:

To search Galaxy mailing lists use the unified search at:

Reply via email to