{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/image-spec/issues/751","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/image-spec","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/image-spec/issues/751/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/image-spec/issues/751/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/image-spec/issues/751/events","html_url":"https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/issues/751","id":361078317,"node_id":"MDU6SXNzdWUzNjEwNzgzMTc=","number":751,"title":"Representation of \"Container\" for Bioschema, and Ontology","user":{"login":"vsoch","id":814322,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjgxNDMyMg==","avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/814322?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch","html_url":"https://github.com/vsoch","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":7,"created_at":"2018-09-17T23:14:19Z","updated_at":"2018-10-10T14:13:43Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"NONE","body":"hey opencontainers team!\r\n\r\nI'm working on creating a representation for a \"Container\" in bioschemas, the goal being that this feeds into schema.org, and schema.org is the bread and butter powering the Google Datasets search. So you can imagine, being able to represent containers and then have Google discover them across these webby places and index is going to be very important for curation and search of (what is currently) a messy universe of peanut butter and jelly container piles.\r\n\r\nToward this goal, I'm taking a [first shot at this addition](https://github.com/BioSchemas/specifications/issues/207). Importantly, I want the specification to be entirely derived from the specifications here, and start out by modeling the higher level things. The work is early, but I want to ask you about some mappings (if you think they are reasonable to start). Remember that we can of course tweak these once the initial draft is done! Here we go!\r\n\r\n## Organization\r\nPlease [see here](https://github.com/BioSchemas/specifications/issues/207) for the organization I think is logical for the root of a Container, and also the modeling of a `ContainerRecipe` and `ContainerRegistry` (which now I'm thinking might make sense to mirror OCI and be called `ContainerDistribution`. For easy reference, here is the overall first plan I'm working on:\r\n\r\n```bash\r\nThing > CreativeWork > SoftwareApplication > Container > ContainerImage\r\n                                                         ContainerRuntime\r\n                                                         ContainerRecipe\r\n                                                         ContainerDistribution\r\n```\r\n\r\nwhere the list there would match the Image, runtime, (no match for recipe, but important to model because we have repositories of just Recipes, for example?), and then distribution. I will have a proper drafty thing for you to critique this in detail, for now I just want to ask about particular mappings (below).\r\n\r\n## Ontology\r\n\r\nAs far as I can tell, we don't have a container ontology. The closest I found (thanks @satra !) is [this one](http://security.polito.it/ontology/) that has virtualization. I reached out to them to see if they had thoughts about modeling containers there, but we would want uris to reference in this schema. Does anyone know anything about options here? For a lot of the below, I'm wondering if we need to tackle this (somewhat scary and uncharted) domain of creating a simple container technology based off the specs here.\r\n\r\n## Features\r\nThe \"SoftwareApplication\" has a field for \"FeatureList.\" In the [image spec](https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/blob/master/spec.md) I noticed general features (at the bottom) for signatures and federated naming. Is that a reasonable start?\r\n\r\n**featureList**\r\n\r\n - Text or URL\t\r\n - Features or modules provided by this application (and possibly required by other applications).\t\t\t\r\n\r\nWe would want to say \"Please choose a value from [EDAM:Operation](http://oci.org/ontology/operation_0004).\r\n\r\nAnd then the example would be like:\r\n\r\n```json\r\n\"{\r\n  \"\"@type\"\": [\"\"SoftwareApplication\"\", \"\"Container\"\"],\r\n  \"\"featureList\"\": [\"\"http://oci.org/ontology/topic_0821\"\", \r\n                    \"\"http://oci.org/ontology/topic_0821\"\"]\r\n}\"\r\n```\r\n\r\nLet's start with just this simple question for now - I'm just looking over the parent terms and attributes now (from SoftwareApplication and CreativeWork) and will tackle the Container specific ones next (from the standards here) and I'll update this issue as I run into questions. In the meantime, please let me know your thoughts on the above, and please excuse my ontology noobness, just learning this stuff :)"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/image-spec/issues/comments/428588347","html_url":"https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/issues/751#issuecomment-428588347","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/image-spec/issues/751","id":428588347,"node_id":"MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQyODU4ODM0Nw==","user":{"login":"vsoch","id":814322,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjgxNDMyMg==","avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/814322?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch","html_url":"https://github.com/vsoch","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vsoch/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2018-10-10T14:13:43Z","updated_at":"2018-10-10T14:13:43Z","author_association":"NONE","body":"Google Dataset Search uses schema.org, so the idea is to get a representation of a container in there so we can eventually tag containers and have the universe of them searchable! See -->https://www.blog.google/products/search/making-it-easier-discover-datasets/ for the first work with Datasets. I don't think we need to have all the details (attributes) from OCI, but rather the higher level ones, and this is what I'd like to discuss - what from OCI should map over to schema.org. I'm glad to do the work to generate the mapping, but the second (important) bit is to get support from the community here for the specification there."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"vsoch"}}