Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

NTR: 'is contact information for' #713

Open
jmwhorton opened this issue Apr 13, 2023 · 9 comments · May be fixed by #778
Open

NTR: 'is contact information for' #713

jmwhorton opened this issue Apr 13, 2023 · 9 comments · May be fixed by #778

Comments

@jmwhorton
Copy link
Contributor

Note: this relationship is currently in OBIB (http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/OBIB_0000734)

Preferred term label

is contact information about

Textual definition

a is contact information for b, if a is a information content entity, b is a human being or an organization and a identifies a physical location or electronic resource that allows to initiate communication with a.

Term Editor

Mathias Brochhausen

Suggested parent term

is about (http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/IAO_0000136)

@wdduncan
Copy link
Collaborator

Should the name be 'is contact information for' or 'is contact information about'? The former seems to make more sense.

Can someone from OBIB please join the next call to discuss?

@wdduncan
Copy link
Collaborator

Any updates on this?

@jmwhorton
Copy link
Contributor Author

Per 6-22 OBIB call, 'is contact information for' makes more sense.

If there aren't any other comments, @jmwhorton will make the pull request.

@wdduncan
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @jmwhorton
I'm just checking up on this.

@jmwhorton
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hello! Pull request is still incoming, should have some time this week.

@jmwhorton
Copy link
Contributor Author

@wdduncan What is the ID I should use for this term? Thanks.

@wdduncan
Copy link
Collaborator

@jmwhorton Please use RO_0017007.

@jmwhorton jmwhorton changed the title NTR: 'is contact information about' NTR: 'is contact information for' Dec 29, 2023
@jmwhorton jmwhorton linked a pull request Dec 29, 2023 that will close this issue
@anitacaron
Copy link
Collaborator

This seems like an annotation property and should be added to the OBO Metadata Ontology (OMO) instead.

@mbrochhausen
Copy link

Can you please clarify. My understanding was all relations go into the relation ontology. Did that change? thx

@anitacaron anitacaron linked a pull request Feb 23, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants