add :funder and :funding to BIBO

[kcoyle]

• SRAP uses srap:funding as the property that has the SRAP Grant shape as its value shape
• SRAP uses srap:Grant as a class on the SRAP Grant shape
• SRAP Grant shape uses srap:funder as the property that takes a string or an identifier for the funding agency.

Recommendation:
Add the following to BIBO:

• bibo:Grant class (like schema:Grant)
• bibo:funding property (like schema:funding)
  • domain: ?? perhaps not needed
  • range(Includes?): bibo:Grant
• bibo:funder property (like schema:funder)
  • domain: bibo:Grant
  • range(Includes?): foaf:Organization, or dcterms:Organization if defined

[kcoyle]

See: https://rioxx.net/profiles/v3-0-final/
https://schema.org/docs/search_results.html?q=funder

These have the grant/funder concepts in their vocabularies.

[osma]

See preprint-with-dataset example, it has two grants (one from Australian Research Council, another from John Templeton Foundation)

[niklasl]

Here are the variations I thought of (that are implied in the https://schema.org/funding and https://schema.org/funder design):

</project/2023/112/output/2025/1> a bibo:AcademicArticle ;
  bibo:funder </org/SomeInstitute> .

</project/2023/112/output/2025/1> a bibo:AcademicArticle ;
  bibo:funding [  a bibo:FundingSource ;  # a more inclusive, yet purposefully distinct, class
      dct:identifier "GRANT-X1234" ;
      dct:description "2M SEK was granted for a small research group over a period of two years."@en ;
      bibo:funder </org/SomeInstitute> ] .

Possible property declarations in BIBO, using the somewhat strong semantics that BIBO currently employs:

bibo:funder a owl:ObjectProperty ;
  # skos:closeMatch sdo:funder ;
  # open domain
  rdfs:range dct:Agent .

bibo:funding a owl:ObjectProperty ;
  # skos:closeMatch sdo:funding ;
  # open domain
  # either open range, or explicit qualified:
  rdfs:range bibo:FundingSource .

bibo:FundingSource a rdfs:Class .
#    skos:narrowMatch sdo:Grant ;
# This is *not* disjointWith dct:Agent; but the recommended simple pattern is
# to link directly from a document to an agent using bibo:funder, and use
# bibo:funding as a qualified relationship.
# Naming choice based on bibo:ReferenceSource (but the latter is subClassOf
# bibo:Document).

(If we want to add new definitions using dcam:rangeIncludes instead, we might propose (to the UB) to do that in general for BIBO, going forward. That might also weaken the argument for bibo:FundingSource in favour of the already proposed bibo:Grant.)

[kcoyle]

"Funder" makes sense, but "funding" is problematic because gerunds are so ambiguous in English. I would prefer that we add something to "funding" to make it clearer: "fundingData", "fundingInfo" -- ... I wish I could think of something better!

[osma]

How about fundingSource as the property?

[kcoyle]

bibo:funder a owl:ObjectProperty ;
  # skos:closeMatch sdo:funder ;
  # open domain
  rdfs:range dct:Agent .

bibo:fundingSource a owl:ObjectProperty ;
  # skos:closeMatch sdo:funding ;
  # open domain
  # either open range, or explicit qualified:
  rdfs:range bibo:Funding

bibo:Funding a rdfs:Class .
#    skos:narrowMatch sdo:Grant ;
# This is *not* disjointWith dct:Agent; but the recommended simple pattern is
# to link directly from a document to an agent using bibo:funder, and use
# bibo:funding as a qualified relationship.
# Naming choice based on bibo:ReferenceSource (but the latter is subClassOf
# bibo:Document).

[osma]

Proposed strawman definitions:

bibo:funder property: "A person or organization that supports an activity, project or entity through a financial or material contribution."

bibo:fundingSource property: "A source of funding that has supported the activities related to the resource."

bibo:Funding class: "An instance of financial or material support provided by a person or organization to enable or sustain an activity, project, or entity."

[tombaker]

These work for me. Would these have domains and ranges?

[osma]

No domains. Ranges as in @kcoyle's comment above.