I see that you have invented and use a vocabulary for describing the
elements of OBO term specifications. An interesting piece of work, but
you may be unintentionally reinventing the wheel. Alternatively, you
could consider using the SKOS vocabulary, endorsed by W3C.
At a first glance, many of oboinowl resources correspond to skos ones,
though the mapping may not be obvious in some cases. For example, you
address definitions by means of the class called 'definition', while in
SKOS 'definition' is rather a property; where you have 'synonym' (a
class), SKOS provides 'altLabel' (a property); etc.
Have a look:
http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/
--
Wacek Kusnierczyk
------------------------------------------------------
Department of Information and Computer Science (IDI)
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)
Sem Saelandsv. 7-9
7027 Trondheim
Norway
tel. 0047 73591875
fax 0047 73594466
------------------------------------------------------
