You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The idea is that if i generate a cwl-abstract file now with this then, in the future, it could be updated(as in, generating a new version) when the full galaxy-cwl is working, which will produce executable cwl descriptions. So...look carefully what and how the executable cwl is being produced from galaxy in the galaxy-cwl project (see https://github.com/common-workflow-language/galaxy)
All steps in the CWL-abstract should have the same class ? something like Galaxy_step, how does this affects the evolution of the generated cwl-abstract to the real ones in the future? what is it actually being printed as class in the cwl-galaxy project?
The main thing that I should take into account to implement this is that all 3 ids (the one in the galaxy workflow file and the ones i set for cwl abstract in each case...from run or from static workflow), are the same in each step. -Take into account the different Galaxy workflow format versions AND the CWL versions: should I create different branches for the versions/combinations
Something similar to datatypes happens with tool/job information about the operation it is performing, ideally i would like to tag that using edam, but thats only available in a handful of galaxy tools, although it should be widely available if i look in bio.tools but there is no direct link between galaxy tools and bio.tools entries
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The idea is that if i generate a cwl-abstract file now with this then, in the future, it could be updated(as in, generating a new version) when the full galaxy-cwl is working, which will produce executable cwl descriptions. So...look carefully what and how the executable cwl is being produced from galaxy in the galaxy-cwl project (see https://github.com/common-workflow-language/galaxy)
All steps in the CWL-abstract should have the same class ? something like Galaxy_step, how does this affects the evolution of the generated cwl-abstract to the real ones in the future? what is it actually being printed as class in the cwl-galaxy project?
The main thing that I should take into account to implement this is that all 3 ids (the one in the galaxy workflow file and the ones i set for cwl abstract in each case...from run or from static workflow), are the same in each step. -Take into account the different Galaxy workflow format versions AND the CWL versions: should I create different branches for the versions/combinations
Datatypes: when extracting input/output datatypes from Galaxy workflow steps, can I assume these datatypes exist in CWL? otherwise is there any way to convert them to CWL types? even if its not a 1-to-1 correlation. or what is the intersection between Galaxy datatypes and CWL types?. what about Galaxy tools that define specific types?
CWL uses ontologies to define formats. The can be from IANA (https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml) or EDAM (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ols/ontologies/edam/terms?iri=http%3A%2F%2Fedamontology.org%2Fformat_1915)
See also https://www.commonwl.org/user_guide/16-file-formats/
For example, to indicate a bam file, it should be
type: File
label: Aligned sequences in BAM format
format: edam:format_2572
Something similar to datatypes happens with tool/job information about the operation it is performing, ideally i would like to tag that using edam, but thats only available in a handful of galaxy tools, although it should be widely available if i look in bio.tools but there is no direct link between galaxy tools and bio.tools entries
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: