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

Determine datatypes in results model of metadata service #14

Open
jmkeil opened this issue Mar 28, 2018 · 2 comments
Open

Determine datatypes in results model of metadata service #14

jmkeil opened this issue Mar 28, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@jmkeil
Copy link

jmkeil commented Mar 28, 2018

Currently the metadata service returns sometimes String and sometimes Array for the following attributes. The datatype must be strictly determined to enable automated processing.

parameter example terminology providing String example terminology providing Array
date CHEBI FLOPO
versionIRI ENVO QUDT
saved-by CHEBI FLOPO
default-namespace ENVO FLOPO
type ENVO QUDT
comment NCBITAXON ENVO

Further, for some terminologies attributes are provided that are not listed in the API documentation. I recommend to guarantee the use Array for each attribute. This allows the automated processing even of unexpected properties.

By the way: In case of QUDT, due to the multiple included files, the result is a total mess.

@DavidFichtmueller
Copy link

Dear Jan Martin,
thank you for your feedback. However the data that is displayed on the /metadata page of a terminology comes from the terminology itself, it is not curated/modified by us. For the terminologies that were created for the GFBio project, we try to have the data harmonized, but all of the examples you stated above are from external sources that we just imported and where we do not want to modify this external content. The data shown at the main API point of a terminology (e.g. https://terminologies.gfbio.org/api/terminologies/QUDT ) is the curated metadata which we provide and harmonize. If you need any common information to be included in this interface as well, let us know and we might update the metadata for the respective terminologies. I hope this helps.

@naouelkaram
Copy link

Hi David, actually Jan Martin is right, we should have the same JSON output format also for internal metadata. I will change the output to array for all values.
Concerning QUDT the output is effectively a mess, thanks for the report.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants