Re: [Gusdev-gusdev] ReviewStatus issues

[<ju...@cs...>]

Steve Fischer <sfi...@pc...> writes:
=>
=> [...]
=>
=> yes, that attribute will be in 3.5.
=> patching it is kind of a pain.
=>
=> i'm wondering if your use case might be better satisfied by using
=> prediction algorithm or the external_database_release_id to track who
=> made the feature.

prediction_algorithm_id, like review_status_id, does not exist
in schema version 3.0.

As for external_database_release_id  I suppose that could be
used.  So far, we have only used the External_Database/External_Database_Release
tables to identify collections of sequences.  Would this
not be against the conception of the schema to use these tables
to identify collections of features?

=> (conceptually review status has to do with what the
=> curators have done to the feature).

If one considers that the first step of the curator is to
identify a feature, then perhaps there is no conflict
between your conceptual use of SRes.ReviewStatus
and the use I have suggested?  One of the suggested
values for SRes.ReviewStatus.name, "annotated",
seems to cover this.

=> if you still want to patch it, let me know and we'll describe how.

If you could, that would be great.  There is probably no need to
send this to the list, unless others mention that they are
interested.

Thanks again!

Josef

=>
=> >My previous mail:
=> >=>
=> >=>  From: Josef Jurek <ju...@cs...>
=> >=>  To: gus...@li...
=> >=>  Message-Id: <200...@ga...>
=> >=>  Subject: [Gusdev-gusdev] Another necessary field
=> >=>  Date: Tue,  1 Feb 2005 17:35:11 -0600 (CST)
=> >=>
=> >=>
=> >=>  According to the schema browser, DoTS.NAFeature has
=> >=>  the field review_status_id which of course
=> >=>  points to a row in the table SRes.ReviewStatus.
=> >=>  However, in my installation of GUS, schema version 3.0,
=> >=>  DoTS.NAFeature lacks this field.
=> >=>
=> >=>  Such a thing would be very useful to have to distinguish
=> >=>  between the annotation of the same sequence by
=> >=>  different organizations.
=> >=>
=> >=>  In fact, I could use this field right now.  Does
=> >=>  schema version 3.2 have this field?  If so,
=> >=>  can someone suggest a patch/rebuild method
=> >=>  so that I could at least upgrade the NAFeature
=> >=>  table in my installation?
=> >=>
=> >=>  Thanks, Josef
=> >=>
=> >
=> >
=> >





Daphne Preuss Laboratory
Molecular Genetics and Cell Biology
The University of Chicago
ju...@cs...

voice: (773) 834-3985
fax:   (773) 702-6648