[cellml-discussion] Should groups be allowed to imply metadata information?

[Andrew Miller]

Hi all,

The CellML 1.1 specification says:

"
6.5.3  Groups must not imply metadata information

Modellers must not use CellML groups to associate properties or 
classification information with sets of components. The metadata 
functionality is the proper method for making such associations. This 
increases the chance of that information being used by a range of CellML 
processing software.
"

If extension groups cannot be used to imply metadata or mathematical 
information, then there is not really anything left for them to imply. I 
think that we should do one of the following:
1) Non-standard relationship types be disallowed, and only encapsulation 
and containment be kept (encapsulation does affect the mathematical 
formulation of the model, while containment is really metadata 
information), or perhaps only encapsulation should be kept, with 
containment data represented in metadata, or,
2) Allow groups to be used for metadata information, but in the 
informatively annotated specification encourage the CellML community to 
standardise on exactly how a certain type of metadata should be 
represented (this is required whether RDF/XML or groups is used to 
express the metadata anyway).

I would welcome any opinions that anyone might have on this.

Best wishes,
Andrew