This issue is motivated by achieving conformance with the OBO dashboard. In the near future, lack of conformance with the dashboard checks will impact an ontology's listing on the OBO homepage.
One of the failures is usage of an object property (part_of) with the same label as one found in RO. OBO ontologies should reuse RO properties whenever possible. In this case, CDAO actually contains another property stated to be equivalent to part_of: belongs_to. This situation isn't really encouraged either.
So I propose that we deprecate part_of, and rewrite any axioms using that property to instead use belongs_to. This should all be logically equivalent. Down the road we can remove the equivalence statement. This plan of action resolves the name conflict with RO, and simplifies the equivalent property situation. Farther down the road we could choose to adopt appropriate RO properties directly.
This issue is motivated by achieving conformance with the OBO dashboard. In the near future, lack of conformance with the dashboard checks will impact an ontology's listing on the OBO homepage.
One of the failures is usage of an object property (part_of) with the same label as one found in RO. OBO ontologies should reuse RO properties whenever possible. In this case, CDAO actually contains another property stated to be equivalent to
part_of: belongs_to. This situation isn't really encouraged either.So I propose that we deprecate part_of, and rewrite any axioms using that property to instead use belongs_to. This should all be logically equivalent. Down the road we can remove the equivalence statement. This plan of action resolves the name conflict with RO, and simplifies the equivalent property situation. Farther down the road we could choose to adopt appropriate RO properties directly.