common-workflow-language / common-workflow-language/cwlprov
cwlprov:relationship sketch
- Dominant language
- No language data
- Stars
- 20
- Forks
- 3
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Together with #1 this attempts to find a way to pre-define domain-specific provenance that would be generated at workflow run time. The idea is define a set of relationships that will be added onto the produced outputs of a step to relate it to other data values or concepts at creation time.
These can use domain-specific ontologies like [EDAM ontology](http://edamontology.org/page) or [BioSchemas](https://bioschemas.org/specifications/), or more generic ones likes [PROV](https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/) or [schema.org](https://schema.org/)
``` cwl
#!/usr/bin/env cwl-runner
cwlVersion: v1.0
class: Workflow
inputs:
first_input: File
second_input: long
steps: []
outputs:
first_output:
type: File
outputSource: first_input
cwlprov:relationships:
prov:wasDerivedFrom: [ '#inputs.second_input' ]
prov:wasInfluencedBy: [ '#inputs.second_output' ]
$namespaces:
prov: http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
cwlprov: https://w3id.org/cwl/prov#
$schemas:
- http://www.w3.org/ns/prov.owl
```
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
Research direction
Start by reading issue #1 and the provenance relationships shown in this issue's CWL example, including the referenced PROV, EDAM, BioSchemas, and schema.org material. Define the intended relationship set and how those relationships should be added to workflow outputs at run time; no implementation files or tests are named, so completion criteria need to be established first.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- data
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 20/100