Ontology meeting 2022-01-24: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (→Agenda) |
m (→Agenda) |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Implemented in ontology | Implemented in ontology | ||
see for example GO:2001077 | see for example GO:2001077 | ||
Question: do we need to remove the 'conforms to dp' when we obsolete terms? Are these automatically calculated at each GO release? | |||
===Protein-complex organization/assembly/disassembly=== | ===Protein-complex organization/assembly/disassembly=== |
Revision as of 09:08, 18 January 2022
- Group members: Pascale, Karen, Harold, Raymond, Peter, Jim, Tanya, Kimberly, David, Chris, Paul
- Present:
- Regrets:
Announcements
Agenda
Following up on previous items
ChEBI update
https://github.com/geneontology/go-ontology/pull/22092 Jan 1 release was supposed to remove the links of fumaric acid, succinic acid, and malonic acid to lipid; can we start the import again?
Design patterns
Implemented in ontology see for example GO:2001077
Question: do we need to remove the 'conforms to dp' when we obsolete terms? Are these automatically calculated at each GO release?
Protein-complex organization/assembly/disassembly
Problem with relations used in logical definition https://github.com/geneontology/go-ontology/issues/22488
RO has been changed, so that the logical issue is fixed; however do we want to use 'results in assembly of' or 'has output' for protein-containing complex assembly? This decision impacts the relations used in GO-CAM and extensions, since we aim to align them.