Relationship between a contributor and its ORCID (organisation and its ROR) #496

Activity

1. kara-mela

   assigned

   eilmiv

   on Sep 15, 2026
2. kara-mela

   added

   discussion requiredIssues that require a group discussionIssues that require a group discussion

   on Sep 15, 2026
3. eilmiv commented on Sep 18, 2026

   

   eilmiv

   on Sep 18, 2026

   Collaborator

   More actions

   Here are some more possible arguments for this change:

   • It's a simple change (just one search and replace) and owl:sameAs is stricter / more informative
   • Two things that have the same rdfs:seeAlso values are not necessarily considered the same. The following does not allow concluding that person1 and person2 are affiliated with the same organisation unless special heuristics are used:

   :person1 sdo:affiliation [foaf:name "HZB"; rdfs:seeAlso <https://ror.org/02aj13c28>] .
   :person2 sdo:affiliation [foaf:name "HZB"; rdfs:seeAlso <https://ror.org/02aj13c28>] .
4. cthoyt commented on Sep 29, 2026

   

   cthoyt

   on Sep 29, 2026

   Last edited by cthoyt

   More actions

   why not use the ROR URI directly as the identifier for the affiliation, instead of creating a blank node?

   :person1 sdo:affiliation <https://ror.org/02aj13c28> .
   :person2 sdo:affiliation <https://ror.org/02aj13c28> .
   
   <https://ror.org/02aj13c28> foaf:name "HZB" .
   
5. eilmiv commented on Sep 29, 2026

   

   eilmiv

   on Sep 29, 2026

   Collaborator

   More actions

   why not use the ROR URI directly as the identifier for the affiliation, instead of creating a blank node?

   I would agree that this is a good third option. Here are some implications:

   • Semantically equivalent to using owl:sameAs
   • Determining whether two persons are affiliated with the same organization works without reasoning
   • There would be no duplication of organization metadata
   • This would be a larger (but still not very large) refactor of PaNET_metada.ttl
6. cthoyt commented on Sep 29, 2026

   

   cthoyt

   on Sep 29, 2026

   More actions

   one more note, you would also get the benefit that you wouldn't have to curate the labels or any information about the organizations yourself, and e.g., could just merge in an external RDF-like definition of ROR on release of your artifact / build of your knowledge graph

   I have done this myself - I prepared ROR as an OWL ontology (https://github.com/biopragmatics/obo-db-ingest/tree/main/export/ror) which can also be converted readily into TTL with ROBOT. If desired I could also add a TTL output to the obo-db-ingest repo
7. kara-mela

   added

   vote requiredIssues that required a voteIssues that required a vote

   on Oct 2, 2026
8. kara-mela commented on Oct 2, 2026

   

   kara-mela

   on Oct 2, 2026

   Last edited by kara-mela

   CollaboratorAuthor

   More actions

   Option 1

   :person1 sdo:affiliation [
       foaf:name "HZB"; 
       rdfs:seeAlso <https://ror.org/02aj13c28>
   ] .
   

   Option 2

   :person1 sdo:affiliation <https://ror.org/02aj13c28> .
   :person2 sdo:affiliation <https://ror.org/02aj13c28> .
   
   <https://ror.org/02aj13c28> foaf:name "HZB" .
   

   Voting rules

   Voting will start after the schema change process has been initiated.

   🎉: Option 1
   🚀: Option 2
   👀: neutral (I have seen the vote, but I don't have a preference)
9. kara-mela

   removed

   vote requiredIssues that required a voteIssues that required a vote

   on Oct 2, 2026