Re: [Obo-discuss] OBO Foundry ontology categorization

[Alexander G. <ale...@gm...>]

What is the measure for orthogonality within the obo foundry? How does  
the foundry defines orthogonality? What objective measurments are  
there within the foundry so that the review process does not depend so  
much on reviewers?

Sent from my iPhone

On May 14, 2010, at 1:28 PM, Phillip Lord  
<phi...@ne...> wrote:

> Alan Ruttenberg <ala...@gm...> writes:
>> On Thursday, May 13, 2010, Nicolas Le Novere  wrote:
>>> 2) I want to develop an ontology
>>> And I want to make sure there isn't another that would be better  
>>> suited.
>>> In that case I would rather contribute to the existing one. The  
>>> ontologies
>>> under review are considered orthogonal, and the most mature on their
>>> specific ground. This info is important.
>>
>> But this is incorrect as well. Not being orthogonal may in fact the
>> reason that the ontology has not passed review yet.
>
>
> Yes, and knowing that you the ontology was undergoing the process  
> means
> that you might, for instance, look up information to see what stage of
> the process it is at and whether there are any likely problems.
>
> I would turn this question around. Is there any reason for not making
> this distinction, not providing this information?
>
> Phil
>
> --- 
> --- 
> --- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Obo-discuss mailing list
> Obo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/obo-discuss