You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 13, 2019. It is now read-only.
There are two types of versioning we need to consider: representational and temporal.
1) Representational
Evolution due to change in ontology or scientific understanding. (Perhaps even to correct an error.)
2) Temporal
Evolution of sequential observations over time in a given patient/cohort/organism.
In both cases, we need a way to uniquely reference a specific version of a phenopacket instance, while being able to trace its history. This may have implications for the phenopacket registry more broadly. Long-tail repos like Dryad, Zenodo, etc are great at issuing DOIs but currently not up to that challenge of exposing versions in a sensible way. I love the way that F1000 displays/handles versioning. We should aim for that with the temporal considerations somehow woven in.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
There are two types of versioning we need to consider: representational and temporal.
1) Representational
Evolution due to change in ontology or scientific understanding. (Perhaps even to correct an error.)
2) Temporal
Evolution of sequential observations over time in a given patient/cohort/organism.
In both cases, we need a way to uniquely reference a specific version of a phenopacket instance, while being able to trace its history. This may have implications for the phenopacket registry more broadly. Long-tail repos like Dryad, Zenodo, etc are great at issuing DOIs but currently not up to that challenge of exposing versions in a sensible way. I love the way that F1000 displays/handles versioning. We should aim for that with the temporal considerations somehow woven in.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: