-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Implement versioning ontology per issue 979 #982
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Putting into draft state - forgot to check documentation for necessary updates. |
This can't be finalized until #983 is complete, since the versioning and ops files can't be downloaded so the checks fail. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good, one wording suggestion.
Keeping in draft state until:
|
@sa-bpelakh @uscholdm Do you think it's necessary to state the version and dependencies in the ancillary ontologies as well as gistCore? It looks like a bit of overkill, and these ontologies are always versioned with gist and would likely not have dependencies different from gist's. On the other hand, for absolute correctness I suppose they are needed. |
I'm just curious really - but in reference to 'absolute correctness' around dependencies, dependency ranges, and the like, did you folks look into PLOW? (As indeed, I think 'absolute correctness' is definitely a most worthy goal, as dependency issues have a very nasty habit of getting convoluted/unwieldy/nightmarish pretty quickly once out in the 'real-world'.) |
Moved to 12.2.0 |
@sa-bpelakh: @uscholdm has raised the point that you should make sure this implementation doesn't clash with the new units and magnitudes model (shouldn't, because there is no dependency on gist, but worth checking). |
@rjyounes @Jamie-SA From Protege,
Possible fixes (one or both):
The first fix is already implemented on the develop branch of the versioning ontology and should be ready for releasing a new version, 1.0.1 or 1.1.0. The only 'semantic' change is the explicit import of operators1.0.0 instead of operators. QUESTION: do we have a consistent policy on what to do with loading ontologies from URL when using a 'main URI' vs. a versioned IRI? If so, then we should make the imports of the following work: |
@rjyounes This has now been merged. |
I checked, there is no conflict, as expected. |
Fixes #979.