new terms from Usecase Beta - #249
Conversation
Added terms for reactor types description.
…ments STEM (Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy) are one of the Measurements Techniques used in catalytic research. As we have data sets with metadata, without a sufficent Semantic reference to them, this set should help adress this issue.
|
Dear @HendrikBorgelt, thanks for initiating the process. My ORCID-ID is as follows: 0000-0002-5561-4320. |
|
@IvoKuehnrich - Should we reserve more IDs for your future contributions? How many? ....and are all new concepts added in this PR your work? |
There will probably be more IDs added in future, although I cannot predict how many. Maybe 5-20? I defined the concepts together with Horst-Werner Zanthoff. |
|
This PR was the first with concept changes since the release of v1.0.0. It induced a lot of changes unrelated to your contribution. To make it easier to review only your changes, I submitted and merged another PR (#251) that only updates the concept storage layout. You have to rebase this PR on current main to get rid of the unrelated changes (please rebase; do not merge in changes from main). If you prefer me doing the rebase for you, just let me know. |
Bumps [actions/checkout](https://github.com/actions/checkout) from 4.2.2 to 5.0.0. - [Release notes](https://github.com/actions/checkout/releases) - [Changelog](https://github.com/actions/checkout/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md) - [Commits](actions/checkout@11bd719...08c6903) --- updated-dependencies: - dependency-name: actions/checkout dependency-version: 5.0.0 dependency-type: direct:production update-type: version-update:semver-major ... Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
- stefanzweifel/git-auto-commit 7.0.0 --> 7.0.1 - actions/upload-artifact 5.0.0 --> 6.0.0
Added examples to the top-concepts table in organiz ing-concepts.md for better clarity. Also slightly changed the definition of the top-level concept "Attributes" to have the same style as "Non-temporal abstract entity"
Bumps [actions/checkout](https://github.com/actions/checkout) from 6.0.1 to 6.0.2. - [Release notes](https://github.com/actions/checkout/releases) - [Changelog](https://github.com/actions/checkout/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md) - [Commits](actions/checkout@8e8c483...de0fac2) --- updated-dependencies: - dependency-name: actions/checkout dependency-version: 6.0.2 dependency-type: direct:production update-type: version-update:semver-patch ... Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Bumps [actions/setup-python](https://github.com/actions/setup-python) from 6.1.0 to 6.2.0. - [Release notes](https://github.com/actions/setup-python/releases) - [Commits](actions/setup-python@83679a8...a309ff8) --- updated-dependencies: - dependency-name: actions/setup-python dependency-version: 6.2.0 dependency-type: direct:production update-type: version-update:semver-minor ... Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
0376bb0 to
2393c9d
Compare
|
@dalito, I tried rebasing, and it doesn't look massively faulty. However, since I am new to checking out such a complex rebase, I would like your feedback on whether I made any mistakes. If so, I would just implement a new PR with the "old" existing Voc4cat template, such that we don't need to rebase, but just start from scratch with a new PR. |
|
Sorry @dalito, Copilot already explained to me that there are massive errors. which I must have caused by accidentally rebasing from the fork's main instead of the origin's main. I will close this PR and generate a new PR to not cause more problems. @IvoKuehnrich, I will make an ID request in your stead to replace the change notes, such that you are the creator of the new terms. I will make the new PR after the ID request is resolved. I will mention you in the PR, such that you are automatically included in the new discussion. Sorry for the complications. |
github-project-automation
Bot
moved this from New
to Completed
in Voc4Cat cross-repo view
|
Don't worry. It would also be possible to "fix" this PR by using ( |
resubmission of terms from usecase beta after PR nfdi4cat#249 failed due to bad rebasing Co-Authored-By: Ivo Kühnrich <258046891+ivokuehnrich@users.noreply.github.com> Co-Authored-By: arjunneyyathalaCat <240035935+arjunneyyathalaCat@users.noreply.github.com>
resubmission of terms from usecase beta after PR nfdi4cat#249 failed due to bad rebasing Co-Authored-By: Ivo Kühnrich <258046891+ivokuehnrich@users.noreply.github.com> Co-Authored-By: arjunneyyathalaCat <240035935+arjunneyyathalaCat@users.noreply.github.com>
Resubmission of terms from usecase beta after PR #249 rebase went wrong, which in turn was created as a follow-up of #247 that could not be merged due to buggy action code affecting new concept submissions. Co-Authored-By: Ivo Kühnrich <258046891+ivokuehnrich@users.noreply.github.com> Co-Authored-By: arjunneyyathalaCat <240035935+arjunneyyathalaCat@users.noreply.github.com>
New terms coming from Usecase beta and Term change request for voc4cat:0000122, sample pre-treatment.
As the change request of the terms should be discussed with Ivo Kühnrich and Horst-Werner Zanthoff, please wait for confirmation before merging into main.
ToDo: Currently, I have not mentioned Ivo Kühnrich in the change Notes, since I don't have a respective ORCID or GitHub user account name. Since he provided the terms, I wanted to ask whether I should set him as "created this resource" orwhich terms are applicable, such that I could state something like "provided the label and definition.
Second PR for PR #247 .