-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
[Suggestion] Connect to RO-Crate #121
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
@jan-janssen could you elaborate on the difference. To me, it seems to be driven by a different subset of the workflow community. (Yes, would be great to connect) |
As far as I understand it is basically a zip archive with a file for the meta data which also contains a list of files which are included in the archive and which specifications these files follow. Furthermore, there is the option to add more meta data like a related citation and so on. But this is my rough understanding, I also need to look into this in more detail. |
Thus, it is about an already executed workflow ? |
Not necessarily, I could also imagine it being used to share workflow templates / recipes. But again, I am definitely no expert, we need some more information. |
Thanks! Sure! |
We've just tested it with nextflow and the plugin and there it is storing both the template for an execution as well as the actual run of a workflow, which are different entities as illustrated here, see under provenance crate the blue and red data structures. However, I'm not sure if you can directly extract only the recipe with a dry-run of the workflow, in particular I'm not sure if the logic e.g. dynamic if/while loops are integrated in the file format. |
Based on several suggestions from collaborators, there is already a group discussing the reproducibility of workflow. They are especially focused on storing the meta data together with the workflow in one file format: https://github.com/ResearchObject/workflow-run-crate
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: