dbpedia / archivo Goto Github PK

Use known version properties if available for ontology versioning.

Right now the big ontology table here can't be scrolled horizontally, so if the user adds more columns they can't be seen

Hello archivo developers,
Is there kind of a schedule when new snapshots are taken? Currently, you don't refer to the latest released version of OEO, for example.
Is there a way to inform you about new releases to take a further snapshot? Thanks!

Use the ontology resource (eg. http://dataid.dbpedia.org/ns/core.rdf) as backup if the non-information resource is not available.

Which timezone do you use in your timestamps? For instance, Cinelab ontology has 2020.06.10-175249 as value for Latest Timestamp. Is it UTC?

https://github.com/dbpedia/Archivo/blob/master/shacl-library/LODE.ttl checks for rdfs:label, rdfs:comment.
But some ontologies use alternatives:

• of rdfs:label : skos:prefLabel, dc:title, dct:title, schema:name
• of rdfs:comment: dc:description, dct:description, schema:description

Please allow these as alteranative props in the SHACL shapes

Example about https://databus.dbpedia.org/ontologies/vocab.getty.edu/ontology/:

• shaclReport on lodeMetadata
• complains about label

  sh:focusNode <http://vocab.getty.edu/ontology#ulan1316_principal_was> ;
  sh:resultMessage "rdfs:label is missing or is no Literal"@en ;

• We got

    skos:prefLabel "ulan1316_principal_was";
    dc:title "principal was - person";

• complains about comment

  sh:focusNode <http://vocab.getty.edu/ontology#aat2216_require> ;
  sh:resultMessage "rdfs:comment is missing or is no Literal"@en ;

• We got

    dct:description """things - require - things [in order to exist or work].
Example: broderie anglaise requires eyelets; compact disc players require compact discs""" .

• generatedDocu with LODE looks fine, because it interprets skos:prefLabel and dct:description

Right now Archivo does not handle ontologies correctly that not contain the class definitions but link to them (example: DBpedia ontology) via http://open.vocab.org/terms/defines.
That is the reason the difference between the "official" version has much less triples (8035) than the "develop" version (32177).

It should be possible to include the RDF content from the linked Classes/Datatypes etc. (e.g from dbo:Person) in the ontology.

Start using PYLODE agian in v3

Archivo does have documentation distributions, it would be nice to make them easier accessible, so that archivo could be an one stop ontology lookup tool for humans, like https://devdocs.io/ for programming languages.

When adding/suggesting an ontology via http://archivo.dbpedia.org/add, and upon a successful "suggestion" there is lack of informative message. For example, if the ontology is successfully accepted, then show "The suggested ontology has been successfully accepted."

Also, upon an successful addition, in the UI there are shown set of messages, some in "green", some in "orange/red".
Maybe add a title above the messages, e.g. "Processing log:" and some explanation, e.g. "Note that the red/orange warnings are not critical, but highly suggested to fix them in near future.

Maybe also instead of showing "The suggested ontology has been successfully accepted." show "The suggested ontology has been successfully accepted with some non-critical issues/warnings."

I tried to suggest another ontology for Archivo and it was rejected. It loads just fine in OWL version 5 or 3.5.
Check this and figure out the problem, and let me know what to do.
http://micra.com/COSMO/COSMO.owl

Pat Cassidy
[email protected]

and jump from version to version easily in the diff viewer
optionally would be also good to switch to show only local changes but also have an option to show also changes of imported ontologies (as "virtual" versions see #26 )

Using CORS compatibility for ontologies as the 5th star of archivo:

Proposed qualifying criteria for the 5th star:

• an ontology allows a CORS request when a preflight request was sent from at least two different domains.
• a CORS response allows to use a Content-Type header to preform content-negotiation in the browser RDF client.

As suggested in the forum.

Currently only the pellet reasoner is used for checking the consistency of an ontology for the 4th Archivo Star.

But unfortunately Pellet has some performance issues e.g for https://archivo.dbpedia.org/info?o=http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/envo.owl. By checking the consistency with more/a better reasoner this issue could be prevented. This would also cover the purpose of the Star (checking the compliance with common reasoners) better.

Greetings all,

Checking on the ENVO entry, we noted that the Pellet timeout is reported as a fail. This doesn't seem quite right, wouldn't this be more a "we don't know". So a "?" rather than a star or non-star?

You may also be interested in the OBO Dashboard checks we run on OBO resources.

I am trying to add this ontology but am not able to do. Please check the issue.

http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/pco.owl

For example the bioregistry saves it's ontologies in the .obo format.

It would be nice to allow the parsing/loading of such files into Archivo, but currently rapper/rdflib do not support such files.

Also then the discovery process for the bioregistry needs to be adapted (add new key download_obo).

• foops
• O’FAIRe

Currently the MOD endpoint does not support such large queries

Virtuoso 42000 Error The estimated execution time 869218 (sec) exceeds the limit of 40000 (sec)

So either refactor the query or set hte limit on the MOD endpoint up.
Refactoring the query would be far more simple (e.g. just split it to avoid the UNION)

Until then discovery via void mod will be switched off.

• add some space at bottom
• render star in view table with table with stars

to add later:

• API -> everything programatic, e.g. ping suggestion, download all, etc.
• Develop Ontologies -> workflow wie man mit archivo arbeitet, zB. dev version, etc...
• Add more: SHACL

Right now the skos:ConceptSchemes in Archivo pass the LODE conformity tests because those are focused on owl:Ontology and owl:Classes, but LODE does not document skos:ConceptSchemes or skos:Concepts.

When I initially suggested this ontology, I accidentally entered https:// instead of http:// The resulting check failed at the equality step because the ontology about statement did not match.

I retried submitting the IRI http://purl.org/dsw/ but the ontology was immediately rejected without going through all of the checks (as opposed to showing all of the checks and giving a final panel with the reason for rejecting). I'm not sure why the IRI was rejected the second time without actually running any checks beyond the initial "Index check".

If you can try rechecking the IRI http://purl.org/dsw/, that would be greats.

see e.g. https://bioregistry.io/registry/ero
offer json output including download links and uri scheme as starting point for Archivo

• https://web.archive.org/web/20180831114523if_/http://3dontology.org/3d.ttl

Hello,

I tried to parse the turtle of your RDF Schema ontology file at https://databus.dbpedia.org/ontologies/w3.org/2000--01--rdf-schema/2020.06.10-215336/2000--01--rdf-schema_type=parsed.ttl with a library that uses the N3.js parser.

There, I ran into a problem with the base IRI resolution. I opened an issue with the maintainers of that library, and it seems that there might be an error in the RDF Schema turtle file: rdfjs-base/parser-n3#15

The problem is in the beginning of the turtle code:

@base <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix rdf: <../../1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix rdfs: <> .
@prefix owl: <../../2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/> .

<>
    dc:title "The RDF Schema vocabulary (RDFS)" ;
    a owl:Ontology ;
    rdfs:seeAlso <rdf-schema-more> .

rdfs:Class
    a rdfs:Class ;
    rdfs:comment "The class of classes." ;
    rdfs:isDefinedBy <> ;
    rdfs:label "Class" ;
    rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Resource .

The hash symbol (#) at the end of the base IRI is apparently stripped by the parser (?) and the resulting triples then contain invalid IRIs:

Unfortunately, I don't have time right now to look too deeply into whether your turtle or the N3.js implementation is correct but I at least wanted to let you know about the issue.

It would be nice to have range filters for the archive, e.g show only ontologies with 3 or 4 stars.

Also others should be possible, like triples between 100 and 1000 or sth like that

we need a strategy to resolve that somehow. it can happen that the databus will not work for a day and this would give an http 500 error for the info page and maybe even more for all ontologies that had an update during the outage. i dont know how long this error will persist until the next new version is found, but maybe this will stay forever until resolved manually.
hope that this can be fixed with databus 2.1 migration

http 500 happend when new databus replaced the old one for the following ontologies on jun 30th
https://archivo.dbpedia.org/info?o=https://w3id.org/sense
https://archivo.dbpedia.org/info?o=https://w3id.org/lbd/aec3po/ontology

Currently Archivo has the problem of setting the base URI correctly, e.g. with http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/rdf/sites-schema.rdf#Site

Detect imported ontologies (based on owl:import statements) and

• show them as dependency tree on the frontend
• map/hyperlink the dependencies dynamically based on import statement to the specific imported version (respect the owl:versionIRI or owl:versionInfo statement if specified otherwise match via archiving timestamp(s)) to version archived in archivo and also display the latest version that is archived
• show availiblity status badge for dependencies (for archived ones only for now)
• optionally aggregate some of the statistics (e.g. triple count, bytesize ...)

There is a problem with proxying to the DBpedia Archivo frontend.