Thanks @jplfaria. I made a few updates, including putting @frankolivergloeckner as the contact person - it's Bioregistry policy to have a single point of contact and not a group email.

@jplfaria however, it's not clear what's the actual semantic space here. The URI format doesn't seem to work when using your example. Can you link me to a page that shows something for the example acccession number 11084?

Is it possible that https://www.arb-silva.de/browser/ssu-138.2/AJ001010 is actually the accession numbers that SILVA creates, and 11084 was an NCBI Taxonomy id?

I was going off the folder I believe it has taxonomy data:
https://www.arb-silva.de/no_cache/download/archive/current/Exports/taxonomy/
In that folder in specific my plan was to work ith the file https://www.arb-silva.de/fileadmin/silva_databases/current/Exports/taxonomy/tax_slv_ssu_138.2.txt.gz take a look at the contents there and let me know if that makes any sense. There are additional files with mappings, etc, but I was going to start just with that. Also, I decided only to make this ontology file for the SSU data since that is the most commonly used. We could, in theory, have a separate ontology file for the LSU data or merge both, which I am not sure is a good idea.

Archaea;Crenarchaeota;Nitrososphaeria;Nitrosotaleales;	42950	order		138
Archaea;Crenarchaeota;Nitrososphaeria;Nitrosotaleales;Nitrosotaleaceae;	42951	family		138
Archaea;Crenarchaeota;Nitrososphaeria;Nitrosotaleales;Nitrosotaleaceae;Candidatus Nitrosotalea;	42952	genus		138

here are a few lines in that file, I think it corresponds to https://www.arb-silva.de/browser/ssu-121/AB050229/ but I can't figure out where any of the numbers (42950, 42951, 42952) are on the web page. Or, what does AB050229 mean?

We are bpth having issues understanding what is going on here. Maybe starting this entry could have been more timely. I will spend more time trying to understand the resource to be able to properly represent this entry.

The IDs in the file 42950, 42951, etc seem to be some taxonomy unique ID that only exists in that file, I cant find it anywhere else. When I search fo those IDs as ncbi taxonomy ids, the organisms are different.
Another issues I don't understand is that in the taxonomy file, there are no taxa for the "species" level, I understand that SILVA doesn't always has all taxonomy levels since the taxonomy may not be fully resolved with just the ssu unit sequence but in the GTDB metada file we use to build the GTDB ontology I see mapping to silva at the species level.
i may need to email these authors to understand what is happening.