OE Webex 16Dec08

From GO Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

12/16/2008 09:30:58 AM from Amina Abdulla: Hello folks
12/16/2008 09:32:57 AM from Amina Abdulla: Hi David
12/16/2008 09:33:05 AM from midori: what was it? I took a quick peek at her file, and there were all sorts of oddities
12/16/2008 09:33:25 AM from Amina Abdulla: did I miss something?
12/16/2008 09:33:30 AM from David OS: Hiya
12/16/2008 09:33:36 AM from Amina Abdulla: Midori are you talking about Jane's file
12/16/2008 09:33:46 AM from midori: yes
12/16/2008 09:34:06 AM from Amina Abdulla: yes I was going to ask you if you had any ideas on that one
12/16/2008 09:34:17 AM from Amina Abdulla: I just tried loading the file
12/16/2008 09:35:04 AM from midori: so did I, but I didn't get it to load (Nomi saw a dodgy xref that I missed; maybe that's it)
12/16/2008 09:35:34 AM from Amina Abdulla: Nomi I don't read you
12/16/2008 09:36:00 AM from midori: Nomi, switch to all participants (again ... sigh)
12/16/2008 09:36:29 AM from midori: anyway, Nomi's email just reached the oewg list
12/16/2008 09:37:34 AM from Amina Abdulla: ok
12/16/2008 09:38:59 AM from Nomi Harris: Sorry about that, Amina.
12/16/2008 09:39:07 AM from Nomi Harris: I just stepped away for a minute to get some tea.
12/16/2008 09:39:30 AM from Amina Abdulla: oh ok
12/16/2008 09:40:05 AM from Nomi Harris: So, as I said, I identified and fixed some oddities in Jane's file, but there could be more.
12/16/2008 09:40:35 AM from Amina Abdulla: ok does it still give an error on load?
12/16/2008 09:40:47 AM from Nomi Harris: Yes, I didn't fix all the errors.
12/16/2008 09:40:52 AM from Amina Abdulla: I haven't received the wg mail yet
12/16/2008 09:41:23 AM from Amina Abdulla: Ok, I'll look into it
12/16/2008 09:41:25 AM from Nomi Harris: When we encounter this sort of situation, we might want to put code in the OBO parser to deal more gracefully with these errors--at least give a useful error message.
12/16/2008 09:41:40 AM from Nomi Harris: But we can't possibly anticipate all possible malformations.
12/16/2008 09:41:46 AM from Amina Abdulla: Right I was just thinking about that
12/16/2008 09:41:53 AM from midori: that would be a big help for those of us who don't speak Java-errorese
12/16/2008 09:42:03 AM from Amina Abdulla: As and when we come accross some of these
12/16/2008 09:42:07 AM from Nomi Harris: Right
12/16/2008 09:42:36 AM from Amina Abdulla: Folks b52 has been delayed as I'm still fixing/ testing
12/16/2008 09:42:50 AM from midori: even just a better idea where in the file to look would help a lot, if it's feasible
12/16/2008 09:43:01 AM from Amina Abdulla: Testings been slow on b51 on my side
12/16/2008 09:43:08 AM from David OS: Yep - line numbers for errors are good.
12/16/2008 09:43:12 AM from midori: testing is good. I finally did a bit today!
12/16/2008 09:43:59 AM from Amina Abdulla: Yeah I'll put in a check that pinpoints line number
12/16/2008 09:44:25 AM from David OS: Actually - OE2 seems quite permissive of syntax errors. Arguably too permissive
12/16/2008 09:45:28 AM from David OS: Because of teh XP input bug, I do quite a lot of hand editing. Would be nice to catch more syntax errors early from theses
12/16/2008 09:45:43 AM from Amina Abdulla: It would be a good idead to report these to the wg David
12/16/2008 09:46:00 AM from Chris Mungall: David - yep, it's a fine line between sensitivity and extensibility. But more non-fatal warnings configurable warnings would help here.
12/16/2008 09:46:21 AM from Chris Mungall: configurable strictness
12/16/2008 09:46:51 AM from David OS: Yep - sorry - should get round to reporting. Difficult to find time to report everythiing
12/16/2008 09:48:21 AM from David OS: Hmmm - but where an OBO field has a required syntax, shouldn't that be fatal to loading?
12/16/2008 09:50:00 AM from Tanya: sorry I'm late, lots o bridge traffic
12/16/2008 09:50:30 AM from Amina Abdulla: David I'll have to check before I comment - it should report something like that though
12/16/2008 09:50:53 AM from Amina Abdulla: Hi Tanya
12/16/2008 09:51:04 AM from Chris Mungall: David - yes.
12/16/2008 09:51:10 AM from David OS: OK - just digging out an example.
12/16/2008 09:51:59 AM from Amina Abdulla: So if testing whole components seems challenging - would it help if I made the wiki more detailed?
12/16/2008 09:53:18 AM from midori: It probably won't hurt -- there are probably things that we ought to be testing, but don't even know are there (I know I found out about quite a few OE1 features just in the pre-release testing push).
12/16/2008 09:54:29 AM from Amina Abdulla: Yeah it would be easier to report errors back that way too
12/16/2008 09:54:52 AM from Jen Deegan: My testing tasks are okay as whole components.
12/16/2008 09:56:39 AM from Amina Abdulla: We haven't had many new bugs recently though - just some high priority ones I'm working on already
12/16/2008 09:56:41 AM from Amina Abdulla: ok Jen
12/16/2008 09:57:05 AM from Jen Deegan: We have quite a lot to be going on with don't we?
12/16/2008 09:57:44 AM from Amina Abdulla: Yes - I've fixed the TreViewer to display one-way disjoints
12/16/2008 09:57:59 AM from Jen Deegan: great!
12/16/2008 09:58:09 AM from Amina Abdulla: I have to look into that wrt to SO in the OTE
12/16/2008 09:58:36 AM from Jen Deegan: so that's as a stop gap so we don't need to think about whether to change how disjoints work for now.
12/16/2008 09:59:06 AM from Jen Deegan: I seem to have been volunteered to test the OTE
12/16/2008 09:59:22 AM from Jen Deegan: I think I have quite a lot already if anybody else wanted to do that.
12/16/2008 10:00:53 AM from Amina Abdulla: I guess I'll be looking into some sections of the OTE
12/16/2008 10:01:53 AM from Amina Abdulla: Jen how was your experience with protege?
12/16/2008 10:01:58 AM from Jen Deegan: it was good
12/16/2008 10:02:12 AM from David OS: I use it every day. I'm not aware of any unreported bugs with it. But perhaps I should try to thnk of some things to do with it I don't usually do.
12/16/2008 10:02:14 AM from Jen Deegan: I worked all day today with the Protege 4 developer
12/16/2008 10:02:27 AM from Jen Deegan: we were comparing functionality in P4 and OE2
12/16/2008 10:02:47 AM from Jen Deegan: I have some notes that I could tell you if you are interested.
12/16/2008 10:03:00 AM from David OS: I'm interested.
12/16/2008 10:03:00 AM from Amina Abdulla: Yeah go ahead..
12/16/2008 10:03:21 AM from Jen Deegan: We were looking to see if editing with incremental reasoning turned on might be quicker in P4
12/16/2008 10:03:41 AM from Jen Deegan: they don't currently have incremental reasoning, but they have lots of different reasoners for different situations.
12/16/2008 10:03:54 AM from Jen Deegan: We tried to load a set of files with cross products
12/16/2008 10:04:04 AM from Jen Deegan: but we trouble with obo 2 owl conversion.
12/16/2008 10:04:15 AM from Jen Deegan: however, we got one set loaded, and it reasoned in 8 seconds.
12/16/2008 10:04:32 AM from David OS: FaCT++ can be very zippy
12/16/2008 10:04:37 AM from Jen Deegan: but I'm not sure if that was totally right, what with the file problems.
12/16/2008 10:04:39 AM from Jen Deegan: yes
12/16/2008 10:05:03 AM from Chris Mungall: I am investigating and will put the results on the benchmarks page
12/16/2008 10:05:03 AM from Jen Deegan: Robert stevens said that our resoners and those in p4 would go much faster if we had lots and lots of disjoint relations
12/16/2008 10:05:10 AM from Jen Deegan: thanks Chris.
12/16/2008 10:05:25 AM from David OS: Did you try the OBO2OWl converter built into P4 or did you use Chris'?
12/16/2008 10:05:31 AM from Jen Deegan: he said we could do things like making obsolete disjoint with other ontologies.
12/16/2008 10:05:45 AM from Chris Mungall: I think we should add more disjoints because they help detect errors - but if they help reasoners that's a good secondary bonus
12/16/2008 10:05:52 AM from Jen Deegan: yes
12/16/2008 10:06:01 AM from Jen Deegan: they seemed to think it would really help a lot.
12/16/2008 10:06:07 AM from Chris Mungall: David - I used the NCBO translation which apparently is the cause of the problems
12/16/2008 10:06:09 AM from David OS: Robert Stevens gave me the same advice. one reason I've been using disjoints so myuch more.
12/16/2008 10:06:13 AM from Jen Deegan: also cc could be disjoint from process and function.
12/16/2008 10:06:46 AM from Jen Deegan: also he said things like x metabolism should be disjiont from x catabolism.
12/16/2008 10:06:51 AM from midori: we did suggest making BP, CC, and MF mutually disjoint a while ago ... it just stalled, as I recall
12/16/2008 10:06:53 AM from Jen Deegan: no
12/16/2008 10:06:59 AM from Jen Deegan: anabolism from catabolism
12/16/2008 10:07:03 AM from Chris Mungall: http://wiki.geneontology.org/index.php/Cellular_component_disjoint_classes
12/16/2008 10:07:08 AM from Jen Deegan: yes I thought you had.
12/16/2008 10:07:16 AM from Jen Deegan: I didn't realise the benefits at the time.
12/16/2008 10:07:45 AM from Jen Deegan: if it would help get incrememntal reasoning on the road it would be worth it, as that is needed for the graph viewer as well.
12/16/2008 10:07:59 AM from Jen Deegan: It would free up a lot of our current problems.
12/16/2008 10:08:02 AM from Jen Deegan: or solve.
12/16/2008 10:08:24 AM from Jen Deegan: I noticed some other good things in protege.
12/16/2008 10:08:25 AM from David OS: Will more disjoints have any effect on the speed of the rule-based reasoner?
12/16/2008 10:08:40 AM from Jen Deegan: they do a lot of their editing in a much more elaborate version of our parent editor.
12/16/2008 10:09:01 AM from Jen Deegan: they do cross products and normal relationships in the same big parent editor panel.
12/16/2008 10:09:05 AM from Chris Mungall: David - nope
12/16/2008 10:09:06 AM from Jen Deegan: I can demo it if you would like to see.
12/16/2008 10:09:27 AM from David OS: Sure
12/16/2008 10:09:36 AM from Amina Abdulla: Yeah I'd be interested in taking a look
12/16/2008 10:09:49 AM from Jen Deegan: Also wheneve a term name is mentioned in the text of a term then the name is hyperlinked to the term, and there is a back and forward button as in a brower.
12/16/2008 10:10:16 AM from Jen Deegan: what do other think? Should I demo?
12/16/2008 10:11:09 AM from midori: is there anything else for us to discuss about OE? if not, go ahead and demo. (I don't have anything.)
12/16/2008 10:12:03 AM from Jen Deegan: just looking for their pizza ontology
12/16/2008 10:12:24 AM from midori: mmmm .... pizza ...
12/16/2008 10:12:33 AM from Jen Deegan: mmmm
12/16/2008 10:12:42 AM from David OS: Funny - was just thinking that...
12/16/2008 10:12:59 AM from midori: (nearly dinnertime here ... does it show?)
12/16/2008 10:13:19 AM from Jen Deegan: yoicks! The version I loaded is not in English
12/16/2008 10:13:23 AM from Jen Deegan: would you like to see?
12/16/2008 10:13:36 AM from Jen Deegan: here goes.
12/16/2008 10:13:54 AM from Jen Deegan: can you still see the chat?
12/16/2008 10:14:00 AM from Harold: yep
12/16/2008 10:14:18 AM from Jen Deegan: the panel at the bottom is like our parent editor.
12/16/2008 10:14:37 AM from Jen Deegan: and those are just regular relationships
12/16/2008 10:14:54 AM from Jen Deegan: but the cross products also show in that same panel.
12/16/2008 10:15:01 AM from Jen Deegan: I will find one.
12/16/2008 10:15:31 AM from Jen Deegan: when I click veneziana
12/16/2008 10:15:43 AM from Jen Deegan: you just see 'hasTopping some blah...'
12/16/2008 10:15:50 AM from Jen Deegan: that is a regular relationship
12/16/2008 10:16:06 AM from Jen Deegan: when I click PizzaDeCarne
12/16/2008 10:16:11 AM from Jen Deegan: that has a cross product
12/16/2008 10:16:34 AM from Jen Deegan: Pizza and hasTopping some blah...
12/16/2008 10:16:45 AM from Jen Deegan: that's a cross product as I understand it.
12/16/2008 10:16:53 AM from Jen Deegan: are the mac people seeing this?
12/16/2008 10:16:58 AM from Jen Deegan: chat I mean?
12/16/2008 10:17:10 AM from David OS: I'm on a mac today. Loks fine
12/16/2008 10:17:11 AM from midori: I can toggle between the chat and the demo
12/16/2008 10:17:14 AM from Harold: yes; and JDR would be amazed at how the pizaa ontology has expanded!
12/16/2008 10:17:14 AM from midori: no problem
12/16/2008 10:17:15 AM from Amina Abdulla: yes
12/16/2008 10:17:15 AM from Jen Deegan: oh good.
12/16/2008 10:17:26 AM from Jen Deegan: does that make sense, what I said?
12/16/2008 10:17:28 AM from midori: but sorry, which relation is the xp?
12/16/2008 10:17:45 AM from David OS: Its the one in the Equivalent class box
12/16/2008 10:17:46 AM from Jen Deegan: the one that is under 'equivalent classes'
12/16/2008 10:17:57 AM from Chris Mungall: it is an xp if it appears under "equivalent classes"
12/16/2008 10:18:09 AM from Jen Deegan: so pizza is the genus and the the topping is the differentium I think.
12/16/2008 10:18:22 AM from David OS: has_topping blah is the diff
12/16/2008 10:18:33 AM from midori: oh. ok. NOT intuitive! but I get it now that you've explained.
12/16/2008 10:18:46 AM from Jen Deegan: would you like to see how to add a relationship?
12/16/2008 10:18:53 AM from Harold: your "toppingS" is in a different ontology or node, right?
12/16/2008 10:19:18 AM from Jen Deegan: are those the toppings?
12/16/2008 10:19:34 AM from David OS: actually - has_topping *some* blah. Midori - it becomes easy to folow if you're used to OWL-Dl Macnhetser Synta x
12/16/2008 10:19:37 AM from Jen Deegan: yes I think that's them.
12/16/2008 10:19:42 AM from David OS: Manchester....
12/16/2008 10:20:11 AM from Jen Deegan: you can tell which terms have XPs as they have a little equals sign with three bars in their brown dot.
12/16/2008 10:20:22 AM from Tanya: where's the topping ontology
12/16/2008 10:20:32 AM from midori: I'm familiar with the Manchester syntax; it's the Protege labels I was moaning about.
12/16/2008 10:20:50 AM from Jen Deegan: eek! I forgot how he did it.
12/16/2008 10:20:51 AM from midori: "Equivalent classes" didn't say "cross-product" to me :P
12/16/2008 10:20:57 AM from Harold: I think "has_topping" is a relationhsip[, not "has"
12/16/2008 10:21:00 AM from David OS: Ahh - OK. Those used to be even more confusing
12/16/2008 10:21:22 AM from Jen Deegan: did you see how if I click a name it goes to that term?
12/16/2008 10:21:26 AM from David OS: has_topping is an OWL property = instance level relationship in OBO
12/16/2008 10:21:28 AM from Jen Deegan: then there is a back button top left.
12/16/2008 10:21:57 AM from Jen Deegan: they said they'd be happy to make a skin with our terminology if we wanted it.
12/16/2008 10:22:51 AM from Jen Deegan: I really can't remember how he made that XP
12/16/2008 10:22:57 AM from Jen Deegan: shall I stop demoing?
12/16/2008 10:23:19 AM from David OS: I think you may be able to drag a relationship into equivalent class
12/16/2008 10:23:25 AM from Jen Deegan: the layout is totally configurable like ours.
12/16/2008 10:24:02 AM from Tanya: this is a time I'd love to have audio
12/16/2008 10:24:55 AM from Jen Deegan: me too
12/16/2008 10:25:02 AM from Jen Deegan: I made a relation but sort of by accident.
12/16/2008 10:25:20 AM from Jen Deegan: I'll stop demoing now.
12/16/2008 10:25:24 AM from midori: maybe we should try adding skype to some of these meetings
12/16/2008 10:25:28 AM from Jen Deegan: yes
12/16/2008 10:25:35 AM from Jen Deegan: I think that could be good
12/16/2008 10:25:53 AM from Harold: yes;
12/16/2008 10:26:03 AM from midori: on days when skype decides to play nice for me, I can starta call for up to 10
12/16/2008 10:26:11 AM from Jen Deegan: I gather that it might be possible to have OBO-Edit almost as part of protege so as to have all our cool stuff + all of theirs. Not sure.
12/16/2008 10:26:21 AM from midori: (on other days, it goes glitchy for no apparent reason)
12/16/2008 10:26:47 AM from Jen Deegan: As a plugin maybe.
12/16/2008 10:27:08 AM from Amina Abdulla: I like the idea of having a skype chat
12/16/2008 10:27:13 AM from Jen Deegan: Yes me too.
12/16/2008 10:27:19 AM from Tanya: shall we try sometime?
12/16/2008 10:27:22 AM from Jen Deegan: yes
12/16/2008 10:27:27 AM from Tanya: It beats the heck out of typing.
12/16/2008 10:27:45 AM from Tanya: there are 8 of us today
12/16/2008 10:27:58 AM from Jen Deegan: would get more discussed, more quickly I think.
12/16/2008 10:28:01 AM from Amina Abdulla: Yeah Im sure it'll be easier to get things accross and speed up testing
12/16/2008 10:28:02 AM from Tanya: SKype should be able to handle that
12/16/2008 10:28:11 AM from Tanya: on the dual core computers
12/16/2008 10:28:24 AM from Tanya: for the host
12/16/2008 10:28:24 AM from Jen Deegan: as long as it's started from dual core machine right?
12/16/2008 10:28:27 AM from Jen Deegan: yes
12/16/2008 10:28:33 AM from Jen Deegan: that seems like a plan then.
12/16/2008 10:28:45 AM from Tanya: so amina can host the webex and someone with a dc 'puter
12/16/2008 10:28:47 AM from Tanya: can host the call
12/16/2008 10:28:50 AM from Jen Deegan: yes
12/16/2008 10:28:59 AM from Jen Deegan: shall we do that next time then?
12/16/2008 10:29:02 AM from Amina Abdulla: I can host the call too
12/16/2008 10:29:04 AM from Tanya: yes please
12/16/2008 10:29:17 AM from Amina Abdulla: I have a souped up machine
12/16/2008 10:29:20 AM from Jen Deegan: it can get flaky if one computer does too many things.
12/16/2008 10:29:33 AM from midori: when is the next call -- are we going to try to squeeze one in next week, or is everyone away b y then?
12/16/2008 10:29:34 AM from Jen Deegan: right, that's a plan then.
12/16/2008 10:29:38 AM from Jen Deegan: should we stop now?
12/16/2008 10:29:51 AM from Amina Abdulla: David that reminds me - were you able to get the reasoner statistics for the - too many redundant flags bug?
12/16/2008 10:29:57 AM from Tanya: are we meeting next week?
12/16/2008 10:30:04 AM from Jen Deegan: I'm away
12/16/2008 10:30:17 AM from Amina Abdulla: Yes lets meet next week
12/16/2008 10:30:22 AM from Nomi Harris: I'll be away too
12/16/2008 10:30:23 AM from midori: I'm around, but technically on vacation.
12/16/2008 10:30:37 AM from David OS: Amina - not quite sure what you mean. Perhaps I'm forgetting something...
12/16/2008 10:30:48 AM from Amina Abdulla: Next week will be the last meeting for the year
12/16/2008 10:30:59 AM from Tanya: ok
12/16/2008 10:31:03 AM from midori: ok, I'll try to remember to tune in.
12/16/2008 10:31:04 AM from Amina Abdulla: I posted a comment on the tracker last week
12/16/2008 10:31:07 AM from Tanya: we can do a pilot SKype call then
12/16/2008 10:31:12 AM from Tanya: fewer peope
12/16/2008 10:31:14 AM from Tanya: people
12/16/2008 10:31:33 AM from Jen Deegan: Will there be minutes, for those of us who can't make it?
12/16/2008 10:31:40 AM from Amina Abdulla: Yeah lets do skype too next week
12/16/2008 10:32:02 AM from Amina Abdulla: Yes we'll rotate b/w the wg members for minutes
12/16/2008 10:32:10 AM from Jen Deegan: great
12/16/2008 10:32:24 AM from Jen Deegan: maybe also a rotating chair/agenda writer?
12/16/2008 10:32:32 AM from Jen Deegan: we do that on other calls.
12/16/2008 10:32:52 AM from Tanya: maybe the new system will prove so efficient that we'll either
12/16/2008 10:32:52 AM from Jen Deegan: or not, if you prefer to do it Amina.
12/16/2008 10:33:00 AM from Tanya: (1) meet for shorter times each week
12/16/2008 10:33:01 AM from Tanya: or
12/16/2008 10:33:05 AM from Amina Abdulla: No thats a great idea Jen
12/16/2008 10:33:05 AM from Tanya: (2) meet every other week
12/16/2008 10:33:21 AM from Jen Deegan: (3) actually get the work done
12/16/2008 10:33:28 AM from Amina Abdulla: I'd like the wg to get more involved with the agenda
12/16/2008 10:34:07 AM from Jen Deegan: maybe send a mail to ask for items on the Friday and we can put them straight on the wiki?
12/16/2008 10:34:37 AM from Jen Deegan: shall we shove off now? We're over the hour.
12/16/2008 10:34:39 AM from Tanya: no agenda = no meeting
12/16/2008 10:34:54 AM from Tanya: yup
12/16/2008 10:35:07 AM from midori: all righty then
12/16/2008 10:35:12 AM from Jen Deegan: have a good christmas if I don't see you before.
12/16/2008 10:35:16 AM from Amina Abdulla: ok. David I'll msg you on skype
12/16/2008 10:35:25 AM from Tanya: to everyone else too!
12/16/2008 10:35:27 AM from Tanya: bye!
12/16/2008 10:35:29 AM from David OS: Tanya - I agree - a clearer agenda would be good. Bi-weekly meeting too.
12/16/2008 10:35:30 AM from Jen Deegan: bye!
12/16/2008 10:35:33 AM from Amina Abdulla: Hapy Holidays everyone whos not here next week
12/16/2008 10:35:53 AM from David OS: Ok Bye. Happy Xmas - probably won't make it mext week
12/16/2008 10:36:06 AM from Nomi Harris: Happy Solstice to all
12/16/2008 10:36:11 AM from Amina Abdulla: Yeah bi-weekly when there aren't pressing issues is a good idea
12/16/2008 10:36:33 AM from midori: see some of you next week; happy ... oh, let's pick Saturnalia ... to the rest
12/16/2008 10:36:46 AM from midori: bye
12/16/2008 10:37:04 AM from Harold: see ya
12/16/2008 10:37:06 AM from Amina Abdulla: Bye All