Hi Simon
> On May 16, 2019, at 3:01 AM, Simon Opper <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi folks
>
> I'm looking to sanity check my understanding of the re-use of terms between
> taxonomies, glossaries, other assets and ontologies in EDG.
>
> If I understand the EDG documentation correctly:
> glossary terms can trace to other terms via the "traces to" property - ok and
> have this working
> glossary terms can be mapped to another data asset type by the "maps to term"
> property - ok and have this working
Glossary terms can also be connected to each other using skos:broader,
skos:related and a few other properties.
> But I'm unclear on how to re-use glossary terms (in a bidirectional) way with
> taxonomy.
> adding a taxonomy to the includes of a glossary doesn't bring the concepts in.
> adding a glossary to the includes of a taxonomy also doesn't bring in terms
> in the opposite direction.
Typically, users using taxonomies would not use glossaries and vice versa.
Taxonomies make a stricter user of SKOS including support (even requirement)
for SKOS Concept Schemes and various constraints that are described in SKOS.
They tend to be used mostly by people that work with unstructured information,
content management, librarians, etc. Glossaries are tend to be used by people
in the structured information management space - cataloging data sources,
defining terms and connecting them to physical or logical data elements. EDG
defines a number of properties for the terms that are not part of the SKOS
vocabulary, but are commonly used by stakeholders working with business
glossaries. And, of course, you can add your own properties. Glossary terms can
be organized hierarchically, so in that sense, glossaries can also be
taxonomies. The primary UI for working with them is tabular, but you could
switch into a hierarchical view. With taxonomies, the primary UI is
hierarchical, but tabular view is also possible.
It is possible though that some users would want to work with both taxonomies
and business glossaries and would want to combine a taxonomy and a glossary. We
left it up to users who want to do so to define the connections they would want
to use.
In EDG, when you include one asset collection (graph) into another, all
included resources are there. You may not see them in the UI because of how UI
is targeted, but they are there. For each collection type, there is a “main
class” (the root of the asset type navigation) and the UI is targeted to work
with instances of that class and their subclasses.
> I'm guessing a result of the import rules between the two model ontologies.
See above.
>
> Sure, the taxonomy can be exported as a spreadsheet and imported into a
> glossary but this seems against the grain and disconnects the two assets.
>
> So.... is there a recommended approach or workflow to develop glossary, taxa
> and other asset types ? e.g. begin at glossary, add some shapes??,
> import/include to taxonomy and then consume in other assets
> Is there a direct way extract/annotate/use shapes/magic properties/transform
> taxa and glossaries to inter-operate with each other ?
There is no declared subclass relationship between edg:GlossaryTerm and
skos:Concept. You could add one and then you will see terms when you are in a
taxonomy in EDG. Additionally or alternatively, you could also add a subclass
relationship from skos:Concept to edg:GlossaryTerm although I am somewhat less
likely to recommend it.
You could also adjust the way information is presented in the glossaries
(change the root of the asset type navigation) so that it starts with
skos:Concept.
Finally, you could add transformation rules that create {?s a edg:GlossaryTerm}
statements if there is {?s a skos:Concept} statement.
It is up to you to choose the approach that will best support your intended use
cases.
>
> Finally, regarding ontologies and asserting classes as skos concepts I've
> done some reading, gone down the rabbit hole and come back out with the
> understanding that avoid to messy and un-intended entailment issues this type
> of assertion is to be avoided.
Fully agree.
>
> So leaving class and skos assertions behind:
> 3. how then does one re-use the labels from a glossary or taxonomy when
> developing ontologies ? It seems manual to me so far unless I'm missing
> something.
> 4.Can existing taxa or gloss labels be made available to pick at the time of
> ontology class, property and attribute creation ?
I would recommend the following:
1. Create 2 properties: one to indicate that a concept/term should be used to
make a class with the same name, one to indicate that a concept/term should be
used to make a property with the same name
2. Annotate your taxonomy or glossary populating these properties
3. Create an ontology (or use an existing one) and define transformation rules
to create a class or a property with the same name as annotated concepts/terms.
Add any other logic you want to use e.g., create rdfs:subClassOf relationship
between classes if you see skos:broader between their namesake concepts, build
some kind of tracing relationship between classes/properties and their namesake
concepts, etc.
I do not think that the idea of selecting a concept when creating a class
instead of typing a label is a particularly usable one. However, if you want to
do so, you could overwrite a create dialog to implement this. Take a look at
the Development Guide for how to overwrite create dialog with your custom logic.
>
> Once an ontology is created, I assume but haven't got on to testing, that
> cross walks and/or EDG search can perform some entity matching and
> recommendation. Hence hopefully close the loop back to gloss or taxa terms.
> Is this right ?
If you have an ontology and a taxonomy that contain resources with similar
names (labels) and you want to establish some links between them, yes,
crosswalks would help you do this.
>
> Many thanks in advance !
>
> Simon
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "TopBraid Suite Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/fb2c03e9-694c-441d-bbdd-7a0894aab2fa%40googlegroups.com
>
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/fb2c03e9-694c-441d-bbdd-7a0894aab2fa%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout
> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TopBraid Suite Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/D0DEA9B2-A1B1-4770-AD06-BA5B06E08364%40topquadrant.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
