Re: [Gusdev-gusdev] dots.nalocation table

[Steve F. <sfi...@pc...>]

sucheta-

i think the way we have generally done this in the past is to add a new 
feature, not location, for each algotithm or person that predicts or 
edits it.   that is why we have the review and algorithm info on the 
feature.   

steve

Sucheta Tripathy wrote:

>Hi Group,
>
>>From community annotation point of view, I was wondering if it is a good
>idea to have is_reviewed, algorithm_id and reviewer_id in dots.nalocation
>table.
>
>Since one na_feature_id( a transcript or a gene) may be having multiple
>sets of nalocations, so one can easily capture them in nalocation with
>different algorithms and with a reviewed option.
>
>In our application we need several gene calling programs to have locations
>as well as related information registered.
>
>Sucheta
>
>
>  
>