Revision as of 10:57, 30 November 2020

Agenda and Minutes

Discussion with groups about their current status with creating GAF 2.2 files
Note that the specifications were updated to give guidelines on what relation to use with annotations to the root nodes:
- Biological Process -> involved_in
- Molecular Function -> enables
- Cellular Component -> is_active_in
Achieving synchronicity amongst groups wrt applying gp2term relations in a GAF 2.2 file. Note that this is distinct from harmonizing on using the same relations for gp2term for the same, or similar, annotations amongst different curation groups.
Each annotation group should be applying their gp2term relations in accordance with the GAF 2.2 file specifications and their annotation practices, as well as the guidelines for root node annotation relations.
Alex (UniProt - GOA) and Dustin (PAINT) are joining the call today to provide more information about the annotations from their groups/pipelines as these two annotations sources are a common upstream for many annotation groups.
- PAINT test files - ftp://ftp.pantherdb.org/downloads/paint/test/gaf2.2/
Other outstanding issues/questions?

Held from November 16th - 30th
~30 people on and off throughout the week
Focused on generating process-centric models
Good discussions and feedback on process/workflow and tool
REMINDER: please send Paul and/or me your best estimate on how much time it took you to create a model, or begin to create a model with any additional thoughts on your individual experience

We are going to experiment with one meeting-less week a month (second week of the month). Any objections? :-)
People are encouraged, though, to get in direct touch if they have pressing questions or continue to use the github trackers.

- How to capture in GO-CAM (and the MOD imports)?
- New ontology terms and the scope of GO
Currently, a second taxa is just captured in a separate field in the GAF (Taxon, pipe separated when more than one) or GPAD (Interacting taxon) with no relation.
Proposal: capture dual taxon information using the annotation extension field and a 'has input' relation
Questions:
- Does everyone who uses the existing Taxon or Interacting taxon fields for dual taxon annotations also use annotation extensions?
- Would this apply to all children of interspecies interaction between organisms?

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 * We are going to experiment with one meeting-less week a month (second week of the month).  Any objections? :-)
 * People are encouraged, though, to get in direct touch if they have pressing questions or continue to use the github trackers.
-==== Annotation Resources Discussion ====
-* We didn't have much time to discuss this at the Baltimore consortium meeting, so would like to follow-up on this topic on future calls.
-* Please review Judy Blakes' [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1CYbE8omvsGWcqSAjnlQdziq5NNrOqlRqRDSoEReQXxQ slides] on goals and need for annotation from the GOC virtual meeting and add your thoughts to the corresponding [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UG833ux-2_o8_8nDevjH7ycffa01ys6anpH5eA6K71M Google doc].
-* We want to discuss the comments and feedback, particularly in light of the upcoming GO grant renewal due in late January 2021.
 == Annotation Issues ==