Search Mailing List Archives
[bioontology-support] Question about top-classes in EP
Paul R Alexander
palexander at stanford.edu
Mon Dec 2 09:34:50 PST 2013
It could be that the classes that aren’t defined in the ontology file directly are imported from another ontology.
As for the roots, we will only display things that are subclasses of owl:Thing. Classes which have no parent we consider to be “orphaned” and we do not display them in the tree because technically they are not defined as a part of the tree.
Hope this clarifies.
On Dec 1, 2013, at 8:01 AM, Erik Fäßler <erik.faessler at uni-jena.de> wrote:
> Dear Bioontology-team,
> I have a question regarding the top or root classes of the Cardiac Electrophysiology Ontology (EP). I downloaded the ontology’s classes via the BioPortal 4.0 API and observed quite a lot of classes being subclass-of owl:Thing or not having a subclass-of relation at all (966 in my count). I.e. these should be the roots of the subclass-of tree. However, most of the classes seem not to be defined or referenced in the ontology OWL file. Additionally, in the web-frontend for the ontology (http://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/EP/?p=classes) only significantly less classes are shown. I noticed that you can look for additional top-classes downloaded via the API through the “Jump to” search field (example: “relative alternation”) but you won’t be shown the term in the left-side tree.
> I am wondering in which way these classes actually belong to the ontology and how is determined which classes are shown in the web-frontend in the tree and which are not.
> I hope you can help me seeing somewhat clearer :-)
> Best regards,
> bioontology-support mailing list
> bioontology-support at lists.stanford.edu
More information about the bioontology-support