Difference between revisions of "Ontology meeting 2014-12-02"

From GO Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 14: Line 14:


Everyone please take a look at AIs here: http://wiki.geneontology.org/index.php/Ontology_meeting_2014-11-20
Everyone please take a look at AIs here: http://wiki.geneontology.org/index.php/Ontology_meeting_2014-11-20
=== 'Response to' terms again ===
From this week's assert report:
ADD GO:0097044 'histone H3-K56 acetylation in response to DNA damage' GO:0043200 'response to amino acid'
This seems to come from GO:0097044 being descendant of 'response to stimulus' and having an amino acid as input... same as the logical def of 'response to amino acid'.
This is an interesting case. Is the inference too broad for our liking, or are we happy to keep it? If the former, how do we restrict the ancestor?




[[Category:Ontology]]
[[Category:Ontology]]
[[Category:Meetings]]
[[Category:Meetings]]

Revision as of 07:58, 2 December 2014

Attendees:

Minutes:

Enzyme binding

We agreed to obsolete 'DNA methyltransferase binding' from the TG queue a couple of weeks ago, we need to follow up with a plan for how to handle the existing terms in this branch, and guidance as to whether annotators request these terms. They've asked for us to report back on an annotation call.

Axiomatizing multi-organism processes

We've agreed it's a good idea to try and axiomatize at least some of these terms before I leave. We need to agree which relationship I should use - can I go ahead and use regulates or do we need the more specific regulates_in_other_species?

Follow-ups from last call

Everyone please take a look at AIs here: http://wiki.geneontology.org/index.php/Ontology_meeting_2014-11-20

'Response to' terms again

From this week's assert report:

ADD GO:0097044 'histone H3-K56 acetylation in response to DNA damage' GO:0043200 'response to amino acid'

This seems to come from GO:0097044 being descendant of 'response to stimulus' and having an amino acid as input... same as the logical def of 'response to amino acid'.

This is an interesting case. Is the inference too broad for our liking, or are we happy to keep it? If the former, how do we restrict the ancestor?