> > 
> > > Question: Shouldn't all feature URIs follow the pattern /feature/{id}?
> > 
> > As we do not have a separate feature store, features are kept under the
> > URI of the parent object (model or dataset as appropriate). I remember
> > faintly that we have discussed that some time ago on the mailing list
> > and we agreed that feature URIs as sub-URIs of other services are ok.
> > 
> 
> Ok, got it.  But does it have an independent URI which should be somehow
> accessible? Not that it really matters... Just asking.

No, not at the moment. Features are stored in datasets/models and have
to be accessed through the corresponding services.

> > > Also I think that the triple:
> > > 
> > > http://toxcreate3.in-silico.ch/model/9304/predicted/value
> > > http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#anyURI
> > > http://toxcreate3.in-silico.ch/model/9304/predicted/value
> > > 
> > > is not much meaningful.
> > 
> > Agreed, but ist valid OWL-DL ;-). Does it cause any problems - if not I
> > would prefer to keep it at the moment, because I fear to break other
> > parts of OWL-DL serialisation.
> > 
> 
> Are you sure it's OWL-DL valid? The validator at
> http://www.mygrid.org.uk/OWL/Validator doesn't take into account all
> ontological parameters - try Protege for a more thorough analysis.

As far as I remember from comparisons a long time ago
http://www.mygrid.org.uk/OWL/Validator was rather picky compared to
other options (including Protege). I prefer to use external services for
OWL-DL testing, because we cannot run bloatware like Protege on our
continuous integration servers.

> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#anyURI is a datatype. I think however
> it will not cause any problems in ToxOtis and Q-edit. 

Coming from dynamically typed languages I tend to be liberal about these
things ...

Best regards,
Christoph