Added terms for reactor type description

[HendrikBorgelt]

Added terms for reactor typ description.

These terms where added:

reactor type
plug flow reactor
stirred tank reactor
tubular reactor
coiled tubular reactor
continously stirred tank reactor
discontinous stirred tank reactor

[dalito]

You do not need to create new PRs after every change (#72, #73). You could just update the PR by committing more changes to your fork. After changes made by the gh-action, you just need to retrieve the changes back to your fork (git pull). Then you can commit the updated / changed Excel file to the same branch where you created the PR from.

You may have troubles because you committed the changes to the main branch of your fork instead of to a feature branch. Working on main in a fork is in general not a good idea because your main branch will then diverge from the upstream main. Instead it is better to create a feature branch after forking and work on (commit to) the feature branch and create a pull request from the feature branch.

[HendrikBorgelt]

Question for @dalito: Do i still need to change some thing, due to the errors made via the pullrequests/forks, is there still an error in the terms or are the terms just under a final supervison (and therefore might be accepted in the near future?). Sry for the troubles and thank you for the help. Due to the Github action which delets the Excel file, it can be quite confusing to know how one has to change the initiated pull request. Would it also be acceptable to just change the generated ".ttl" file of the pull request?

[dalito]

Yes changing turtle is possible. For you it should be fine. However, for beginners there is a high risk to produce an inconsistent set of rdf files which will not pass validation. I think (put am not 100% sure) that a new, updated Excel file is made available as job artifact on the job summary page also if only turtle files change (e.g. https://github.com/nfdi4cat/voc4cat/actions/runs/8828690448).

I will look at the definitions later today.

[dalito]

@HendrikBorgelt can you clarify if you want to define concepts/terms to describe reactor types

• as used in modelling resulting in e.g. this def for CSTR reactor with infinitely fast mixing and continuous reactant feed and continuous product removal
• as found in reality resulting in e.g. this def for CSTR stirred reactor with continuous reactant feed and continuous product removal. The existing concept reactor type covers this case.

The definitions would be somewhat different and there may be 2 distinct concepts needed.

[dalito]

@HendrikBorgelt - I added hierarchy for reactor types and improved definitions to align with the coming guidelines-updates by @nmoust. Please have a look if you are OK with the proposed changes.

[HendrikBorgelt]

Looks fine for me!