Wikidata:Property proposal/Plant Ontology entity ID
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Plant Ontology entity ID[edit]
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Authority control
Not done
| Description | identifier for an entity in Plant Ontology, a structured vocabulary and database resource that links plant anatomy, morphology and growth and development to plant genomics data |
|---|---|
| Represents | Plant ontology (Q55118572) |
| Data type | External identifier |
| Example 1 | seta (Q126780) → 0025066 |
| Example 2 | Leptoid (Q11754738) → 0025033 |
| Example 3 | fruit (Q1364) → 0025496 |
| Formatter URL | http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/PO_$1 |
Motivation[edit]
We currently lack authority control information for our items about plant anatomy. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 18:00, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Discussion[edit]
- @User:ChristianKl: The prefix "PO_" is part of the id. BTW: I evaluated this ontology some years ago (see: User:Succu/Plant Ontology). --Succu (talk) 20:14, 8 December 2020 (UTC) PS: Why not use equivalent class (P1709)? --Succu (talk) 20:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- Having a formatter url is very useful to look up the definition and relationships. It also makes it easy to query for plant structures that don't have a Plant Ontology entity ID. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- Claiming formatter URL (P1630) as „very useful to look up the definition and relationships“ is your POV. Could your please give a SPARQL to detect „plant structures“ (whatever this means) we don't have here and needs a refinement. --Succu (talk) 22:26, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- Complaing in the same paragraph about "whatever this means" in regards to "plant structure" and being skeptical about it being useful to access a definition for plant structure from an authority like Plant Ontology seems circular. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 22:31, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- Simple answer
Oppose. --Succu (talk) 22:37, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- Simple answer
- Complaing in the same paragraph about "whatever this means" in regards to "plant structure" and being skeptical about it being useful to access a definition for plant structure from an authority like Plant Ontology seems circular. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 22:31, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- Claiming formatter URL (P1630) as „very useful to look up the definition and relationships“ is your POV. Could your please give a SPARQL to detect „plant structures“ (whatever this means) we don't have here and needs a refinement. --Succu (talk) 22:26, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- Having a formatter url is very useful to look up the definition and relationships. It also makes it easy to query for plant structures that don't have a Plant Ontology entity ID. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- @ChristianKl, Succu:
Not done Stale, no supporting comments. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:03, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
