-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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
Ad-hoc synthetic-tree URLs should follow some reasonable convention #138
Comments
At a glance, the notation used in propinquity seems to match our synth-tree node URLs: "mrcaott100016ott108461": {
"supported_by": {
"pg_2448@tree5223": "node898133",
"pg_2542@tree5590": "node963169"
}
}, For comparison, here's a current node id: So it seems we have two different conventions, one for taxa ('ott:1234') and another for synthetic-tree nodes ('opentree/opentree9.1@ott770315'). Thoughts? |
As a side note, it would also be nice to replace 'ottol' in our taxon URLs (as returned from a taxon search), since this has long been renamed as 'ott' or 'OTT'. |
studyid Such a theory might be that Often ' The phylesystem-api does something of its own invention: /study/{STUDY_ID}/tree/{TREE_ID}. (That makes three different conventions.) |
That nicely sums up my thinking at the time. |
Now that we have a preferred notation for node ids (e.g. 'ott:1234' for a taxon, see also propinquity annotations), we should try to follow this when linking to nodes in the synthetic tree. Short of that, we should try to follow some existing convention, possibly linked data (CURIE) and/or REST practices.
See this related discussion on Gitter.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: