Proposal: Move the ABA 'ontologies' here and change their base IRI to BICAN.

[dosumis]

Open questions:

• should we keep the current prefix system?
• Should these be separately maintained/generated component ontologies?

[shawntanzk]

should we keep the current prefix system?

I'd prefer that as they are already in bioregistry (e.g. https://bioregistry.io/registry/mba)

Should these be separately maintained/generated component ontologies?

I'd rather components, in fact, I would not be opposed to a separate repo for them, and they can get pulled in here. This will leave the LinkML stuff that @hkir-dev did with ABA_Uberon stuff (I assume we will reuse that) away from the makefile here which can be cleaner and hence easier to manipulate. Downside of course being that more repos = less centralise which can = hard to track down

[patrick-lloyd-ray]

I don't have strong feelings about the base IRI, but maybe @lydiang does. I'd like to get her input here.

I'm in favor of migration to a separate repo in brain-bican.

[patrick-lloyd-ray]

Let's keep the current prefixes, then.

People are going to want to be able to locate the anatomy ontologies through BICAN resources. If there is a place that makes sense for them outside of this GitHub org, then that's okay. But new atlases (BICAN-related) should be housed in this org. Does that sound reasonable?