superraptor / gsso Goto Github PK

Speaking from experience, I'm guessing someone had jittery fingers and accidentally created a blank OWL Different Individuals Axiom while editing 'agi' (GSSO:002037) (the OWL individual, not the class). Fortunately, the fix is really easy: either delete the blank different individuals axiom in Protégé or delete the lines (261766-261772) in gsso.owl.

Currently, 'social role' is classified in GSSO as a subclass of both 'role' and 'social group process'. Because, in BFO, roles are entities that are realized by processes, this may lead to contradictions down the road. Simply removing the subClassOf relation between 'social role' and 'social group processes' would resolve this.

The OBO Foundry has recently created a topics page at https://github.com/topics/obofoundry. It would be great if you could add the obofoundry topic to your repository, since it's currently listed as active in the OBO Foundry. If you're not sure how to do that, follow the instructions here. The main issue for this task is at OBOFoundry/OBOFoundry.github.io#1538 in case you want some more context or to join the larger discussion.

Hi !

While parsing the different files from the OBO Foundry I noticed a bug in one of the axioms of the GSSO; namely:

    <owl:Axiom>
        <owl:annotatedSource rdf:resource="http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CHEBI_50112"/>
        <owl:annotatedProperty rdf:resource="https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1036"/>
        <owl:annotatedTarget rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#decimal">547.7343</owl:annotatedTarget>
        <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">org. chem.</rdfs:comment>
        <schema:bookEdition xml:lang="e">19</schema:bookEdition>
    </owl:Axiom>

in the OWL/XML file, where the bookEdition annotation get an xml:lang tag instead of having the xsd:integer datatype.

I dont know the history behind this, but there seem to be two different ID schemes for NCBI taxon:

http://purl.bioontology.org/ontology/NCBITAXON/135663

and

http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/NCBITaxon_135663

To maximise the interoperability with other OBO ontologies, it would be good if you could use the latter. You could just use string+replace in your ontology, and it would work I think. The reason is this:

Search engines such as OLS are heavily used by curators; now they are swamped with two alternative NCBITAXON ids.. I think it would be good to normalise..

Currently, this repo uses the Apache 2.0 license, which is appropriate for software, but not data. Better options for data are Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 or CC 0.

Further, this ontology is in the OBO Foundry, which sort of requires one of those appropriate licenses. Would you consider updating the license to be one of these? CC BY 4.0 is a bit better as far as attribution whereas CC0 enables maximum reuse but doesn't require attribution, so maybe you'd want to think about CC BY 4.0

We recently did some work in the Ontology for Medically Related Social Entities on representing gender identities that we thought we'd make you aware of. Our approach to representing them is informed by a past writing on how to represent 'phenotypic sex' and 'gender' (http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-833/paper20.pdf), as well as our general understanding of these entities. We therefore wanted to reach out to see if you'd be interested in either reusing our classes or discussing how to consolidate our representations of these entities.

A comparison of our definition of 'gender role' and yours:

gender role (OMRSE:00000007) = A human social role borne by a human being being realized in behaviour which is considered socially appropriate for individuals of a specific sex in the context of a specific culture.

gender role (GSSO:000087) = A gender role is a social role encompassing a range of behaviors and attitudes that are generally considered culturally and/or socially acceptable, appropriate, or desirable for people based on their actual or perceived gender, sex and/or sexuality.

The differences between our definitions, I think, are rather minimal and should be easy to reach a consensus on.

A comparison of our representation of gender identity to yours, which looks to be imported from MeSH:

gender identity information content entity (OMRSE:00000209) = A social identity information content entity that is about whether some person identifies as some gender.

gender identity (MESH:D005783) = A person's concept of self as being male and masculine or female and feminine, or ambivalent, based in part on physical characteristics, parental responses, and psychological and social pressures. It is the internal experience of gender role.

I should note here that the work we did on gender identity is very recent and probably wasn't available when you first started working on GSSO. The key differences between the two classes is that we define 'gender identity information content entity' as an information content entity (ICE), whereas MeSH defines 'gender identity' it as a personal attribute. Our reasoning for defining 'gender identity' as such is largely because we understand gender identity to be something that can be fluid throughout an individual's life (for more information on our reasoning here, see our definition and comment for 'social identity information content entity'). Another reason not mentioned in our classes is that we believe it's important to distinguish between people who truly do identify as a particular gender identity and those who do not (e.g., simply saying that you identify as a particular gender is not enough, you have sincerely mean it).

Dear GSSO curators,

I would like to submit a request to add a new term 'boot'.

Term Label: boot
Definition: Footwear that covers the foot, the ankle, and sometimes the leg below the knee.
Parent class: footwear (http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/GSSO_004998)
Database cross reference : https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/boot_1#:~:text=a%20strong%20shoe%20that%20covers,(British%20English)%20walking%20boots
Alternate name: boots

Thank you,

Anoosha