Re: [Obo-discuss] ontology term comments and provenance

[Alan R. <ala...@gm...>]

On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Arlin Stoltzfus<sto...@um...> wrote:
> I'm skeptical.  There are over 50 "foundry" ontologies.  Reviewing an
> ontology takes time, presumably.  What documentation got "reviewed"
> for these?  Internal text definitions of classes (what was the minimal
> standard for coverage)?  An external publication or web site?

Just to clarify, there are 0 "Foundry" ontologies at the moment.
During the last Foundry meeting we presented reviews of a dozen
candidates and are preparing to release these reviews and announce
what our next steps are. The list at www.obofoundry.org lists "OBO
Foundry candidate ontologies" and we have discussed that even this
labeling is unfortunate because it sets false expectations, as
evidenced by your misinterpretation.

In fact the review of ontologies is hard and time consuming work,
which is why we haven't made progress as quickly as we would have
liked.

This is a great conversation, in general, and I'll respond to some of
the specific points in a separate message.

Regards,
Alan