You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Many Workflow Hub RO-Crates have used license as a literal string rather than as a @id reference, which mean we get many variants for the same license:
From this I'm getting the feeling we need two outputs, one "raw" RDF which may be exactly as in the RO-Crate, and one data cleaned. This may just be the named graphs #29 are "as is" and the separate output without named graphs has done such data cleaning -- or added this as a secondary named graph.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Many Workflow Hub RO-Crates have used
license
as a literal string rather than as a@id
reference, which mean we get many variants for the same license:https://www.researchobject.org/ro-crate/specification/1.1/root-data-entity.html#direct-properties-of-the-root-data-entity says it should "SHOULD link to a Contextual Entity in the RO-Crate Metadata File with a name and description" meaning it should look like this:
and after parsing to RDF graph:
schema1:license <http://spdx.org/licenses/MIT> ;
https://about.workflowhub.eu/Workflow-RO-Crate/ro-crate-metadata.json also defines the SPDX identifiers with
http
URIs nothttps
-- this is to be compatible with identifiers used in https://github.com/spdx/license-list-data/blob/main/rdfturtle/MIT.ttl etc.From this I'm getting the feeling we need two outputs, one "raw" RDF which may be exactly as in the RO-Crate, and one data cleaned. This may just be the named graphs #29 are "as is" and the separate output without named graphs has done such data cleaning -- or added this as a secondary named graph.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: