You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Unless I am missing something, KGCL allows to manipulate synonym scopes (exact/narrow/broad/related), but it is ignorant of the concept of synonym types (represented in OWL, at least in some ontologies from the OBO world, by oboInOwl#hasSynonymType).
Being able to add types to a synonym would be useful. For example, several OBO ontologies have a policy that abbreviations that may be used to refer to a term should be represented as synonyms with scope related and a type that clearly marks the synonym as an abbreviation.
This could be done with a general syntax to allow arbitrary axiom annotations (as requested in #12), but I think this would be a bit too “low-level” for KGCL. Ideally users should be able to add synonym types without even having to know that such types are represented with a oboInOwl#hasSynonymType under the hood.
Possible syntax:
Specifying the type when adding the synonym in the first place:
create (exact|narrow|broad|exact)? synonym {new_value} (with type {new_synonym_type})? for {about_node}
Adding or changing the type of an existing synonym:
change synonym type (from {old_synonym_type})? to {new_synonym_type} for {old_value} on {about_node}
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Unless I am missing something, KGCL allows to manipulate synonym scopes (exact/narrow/broad/related), but it is ignorant of the concept of synonym types (represented in OWL, at least in some ontologies from the OBO world, by
oboInOwl#hasSynonymType
).Being able to add types to a synonym would be useful. For example, several OBO ontologies have a policy that abbreviations that may be used to refer to a term should be represented as synonyms with scope related and a type that clearly marks the synonym as an abbreviation.
This could be done with a general syntax to allow arbitrary axiom annotations (as requested in #12), but I think this would be a bit too “low-level” for KGCL. Ideally users should be able to add synonym types without even having to know that such types are represented with a
oboInOwl#hasSynonymType
under the hood.Possible syntax:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: