Better handling of objects in logical axioms with export#65
Open
beckyjackson wants to merge 6 commits intomasterfrom
Open
Better handling of objects in logical axioms with export#65beckyjackson wants to merge 6 commits intomasterfrom
beckyjackson wants to merge 6 commits intomasterfrom
Conversation
Member
|
I think we'll end up using Thick Triples for this instead, but we are using this branch right now for a few things, so I'll leave it open. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
While working with Cell Ontology, I wanted to export details about the plasma membrane parts. Currently, if you include "has plasma membrane part" as one of the predicates, it won't return any values, since this is a logical axiom on a class in the format
I think we should distinguish between object & annotation properties when retrieving values for
exportso that the object "foo" will be returned in the previous case. Right now, only object properties on classes are supported, and cardinality is not included. So if you had the axiom:.. it would just return "foo".
I'm leaving this as a draft PR because it may need some fleshing out, but it's a really convenient feature to have.
Note that there are some randoms diffs from running
black, but these should go away once we merge in #63