owlcollab / owlcollab/owltools
Add feature for converting license statements between OBO and OWL
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Java
- Stars
- 115
- Forks
- 34
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
From rlwalls2...@gmail.com on January 20, 2015 14:10:51
The wording for OBO Foundry Principle 1 has been revised to (we hope) make it clearer and easier to implement (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nCCO88uOWgWp3z5AwyapcTP0T_C2ZmdPi7cWiO9_aDM/edit#).
The new wording specifies that OWL ontologies must include a dc:license statement plus a comment on ontology reuse conditions for OWL ontologies. For OBO format ontologies, the ontology must contain a license statement and a seperate comment for any re-use conditions.
Is it possible to add a feature to OORT, so that during the conversion process, these annotations are properly converted?
Thanks, Ramona
Original issue: http://code.google.com/p/owltools/issues/detail?id=112
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reviewing OORT, the conversion process named in the issue, and the linked revised OBO Foundry Principle 1 wording. Determine how OBO and OWL license statements are currently converted; done means license annotations and reuse-condition comments are represented correctly in both formats.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- java
- Domain
- tooling
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100