Feature
Feature
Component description
A feature is a (chemical, structural, biological, toxicological, ...) property of a chemical compound.
REST operations
Description | Method | URI | Parameters | Result | Status codes |
Get the representation of a feature | GET | /feature/{id} | - | RDF representation of a feature | 200,404,503 |
Create a new feature | POST | /feature | name, value (single value or hash) |
URI of feature representation | 200,404,400,503 |
HTTP status codes
Interpretation | Nr | Name |
Success | 200 | OK |
Feature with {id} not found | 404 | Not Found |
Incorrect feature value | 400 | Bad request |
Service not available | 503 | Service unavailable |
RDF representation example:
<ot:Feature rdf:ID="CarcinogenicityToxtree">
<dc:identifier rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">/feature/2</dc:identifier>
<dc:title rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">MyFeature</dc:title>
<ot:hasSource rdf:resource="(link to Algorithm, Model or Dataset)"/>
<owl:sameAs rdf:resource="<link to ontology entry - e.g. BlueObelisk, Endpoints, etc.>"/>
</ot:Feature>
Feature name vs feature definition
If I understand right, your proposal (YAML) assumes there might be more than one value per feature. This somewhat in contradiction with the initial proposal. I would propose to introduce tuples (or set) of feature/value pairs , in order to handle the case multiple values need to be aggregated. Any comments?
Otherwise, I agree feature services is indeed redundant.