From: Chris M. <cj...@be...> - 2008-08-27 12:10:21
|
On Aug 27, 2008, at 11:02 AM, David Sutherland wrote: > Hi all, > > Quick question: Should I avoid using XP terms (i.e.- terms with > necessary and sufficient definitions constucted using > 'intersection_of' > in obo) to define other XP terms? I don't see why not If you look at the combined set of GO xps you'll see plenty of nesting. E.g. negative regulation of S phase of mitotic cell cycle > This is tempting, but I'm worried > it'd put too much strain on reasoners. I'm not sure if this would cause problems in itself, though this may be very dependent on the combination of reasoner used and characteristics of the ontology Let's try it and see! > > David > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's > challenge > Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win > great prizes > Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in > the world > http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ > _______________________________________________ > Obo-discuss mailing list > Obo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/obo-discuss > |