Author: LexEVS Team/Craig Stancl |
Sign off |
Date |
Role |
CBIIT or Stakeholder Organization |
Reviewer's Comments (If disapproved indicate specific areas for improvement.) |
---|---|---|---|---|
— |
— |
— |
— |
— |
The purpose of this document is to collect loader topic discussion and resolution for LexEVS. The focus is on the processing of source content as loaded into the LexEVS terminology server, proposed by the stakeholders and target users to make a better product.
GForge |
Issue |
Resolution |
---|---|---|
Different vocabs have their own way of determining whether a concept is active or not. For OWL we can use Deprecated status. For OBO or RRF we don't have that. We would like to be able to specify what method a vocab is using to indicate deprecated concepts in the loader preferences. |
TBD |
Capture discussion here.
GForge |
Issue |
Resolution |
---|---|---|
The entity status for concepts should use a designated set of statuses that are mappable across vocabularies. For example: |
TBD |
Capture discussion here.
GForge |
Issue |
Resolution |
---|---|---|
All concepts loaded from RRF show as defined, which is unlikely to be true. We need to examine the various sources and see what changes need to be made to the loader to correctly represent the defined/primitive status of concepts in the source data. Pasted below is the email discussion that led to this item. |
TBD |
Capture discussion here.