From: Randy J. <rkj...@in...> - 2008-02-13 21:27:17
|
I also agree that there is no problem with moving the array length up. I would like to ask again: 1. is scanNumber different from <scan> which lives lower 2. can we make msLevel either optional, or a cvParam? Randy ________________________________ From: psi...@li... [mailto:psi...@li...] On Behalf Of Angel Pizarro Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 4:34 PM To: Mass spectrometry standard development Subject: Re: [Psidev-ms-dev] binaryArrayData lengths +1 agreed -angel On Feb 12, 2008 4:27 PM, Eric Deutsch <ede...@sy...> wrote: So there seems to be broad consensus (4 for 4;) that moving the arrayLength up a little higher is a good idea. So instead of: <spectrum id="S19" scanNumber="19" msLevel="1"> <spectrumDescription> ... </spectrumDescription> <binaryDataArray arrayLength="1313" encodedLength="5433" dataProcessingRef="Xcalibur Processing"> ... <binary>AAAAwDsGeUAAAAD...</binary> </binaryDataArray> <binaryDataArray arrayLength="1313" encodedLength="4892"> ... <binary>AAAAAIBJxk...</binary> </binaryDataArray> </spectrum> We will have: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! <spectrum id="S19" scanNumber="19" msLevel="1" arrayLength="1313"> <spectrumDescription> ... </spectrumDescription> <binaryDataArray encodedLength="5433" dataProcessingRef="Xcalibur Processing"> ... <binary>AAAAwDsGeUAAAAD...</binary> </binaryDataArray> <binaryDataArray encodedLength="4892"> ... <binary>AAAAAIBJxk...</binary> </binaryDataArray> </spectrum> Agreed? > -----Original Message----- > From: psi...@li... [mailto:psidev-ms-dev- > bo...@li...] On Behalf Of Matthew Chambers > Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 10:49 AM > To: Mass spectrometry standard development > Subject: Re: [Psidev-ms-dev] binaryArrayData lengths > > I agree that the primary data arrays should probably be treated as > special in the schema so it's clear that they are paired values and thus > peak count could move into the spectrum element or spectrumDescription. > There should still be options to have additional arrays that aren't the > same as the main arrays (for example, an additional set of arrays, one > for a subset of the m/zs and the other for peak charge information). > > -Matt > > > Kessner, Darren E. wrote: > > Any other comments regarding <binaryArrayData> lengths? > > > > > >> (from Rune) > >> If they have to be equal size, then > >> that size ought to be specified in the spectrumDescription. > >> > > > > I agree -- I would like to encode the length in <spectrum> somewhere > > (either attribute or cvParam) so that: > > 1) it's clear that the arrays are of equal size > > 2) Readers don't have to peek into the attributes of the first > > <binaryArrayData> to get the info > > > > I need this right now for the MSData RAMP adapter code, so I'll encode > > it as a <userParam> until a decision has been made on the specification. > > > > > > Darren > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Psidev-ms-dev mailing list > Psi...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/psidev-ms-dev ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Psidev-ms-dev mailing list Psi...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/psidev-ms-dev -- Angel Pizarro Director, ITMAT Bioinformatics Facility 806 Biological Research Building 421 Curie Blvd. Philadelphia, PA 19104-6160 215-573-3736 |