Ontology meeting 2014-01-16

From GO Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Attendees:

Minutes: Paola


How direct does regulation have to be to justify a regulates relationship?

These inferred links result from regulates relationships that have been in GO for some time.

ADD GO:0007272 'ensheathment of neurons' GO:0051969 'regulation of transmission of nerve impulse' ADD GO:0007272 'ensheathment of neurons' GO:0098900 'regulation of action potential'

Paola notes: The ensheatment has an effect on action potential and therefore impulse transmission, but it's not a type of regulation, it's a separate process... what do you think? DOS: The regulating effect is clearly quite indirect (via changing the electrical environment of the membrane) - but do we have guidance on how direct regulation of a process has to be before we make a relationship? The documentation on regulation does not make this clear.

Should regulation of quality and regulation of biological process be disjoint?

If so, the hierarchy will need much untangling as many terms are under both.

Megafile update

Abnormal cellular components (from Harold)

SF 10612 Abnormal terms in component https://sourceforge.net/p/geneontology/ontology-requests/10612/

Protege Plugin for OBO related data

Chris has started to spec out the requirements for a new Protege Plugin.

The main task is to provide a concise and useful representation of OBO-relevant annotation properties (label, def, synonyms, ...).

The plugin itself will not be OBO-specific, but will provide a default mode for OBO (GO?). Here is the current out-line/discussion: https://docs.google.com/document/d/17tph3jwrDGEaa7DyYPOK8HCi2dCDdJxi3VrTWNQpbqc/edit?pli=1#