general review of 'Study' profile 0.2

[nsjuty]

Description - I think most of the descriptions are a bit scant. I would add a sentence or two. Could even refer to terms from EDAM or wikipedia (generally). eg. http://edamontology.org/topic_3379

studyDomain - cardinality - I can imagine some cross domain studies would need or prefer to select more than one domain? I suggest one or more (many)

studyProcess - there is a misaligned (crosses table boundary) URL (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ols/ontologies/efo/terms?short_form=EFO_0001433) that is broken. I'm not sure what it is supposed to be (example? or CV?) or what is refers to. The BioSchemas explanatory text gives 2 further URLs without a clear explanation of what they are representing? Is it simply a CV of specific scientific technologies/techniques used in the study?

'url' does not have cardinality? One study may have a URL to represent it, but may also have a number of datasets that come out of it? So may be worth considering how we tie in to the actual data - I see also citation, but the 'description' of each field leaves it very open as to what would go there? Do we need to say if the data is open?