Re: [Psidev-ms-dev] Precursor spectrum ref required?

[Fredrik L. <Fre...@im...>]

I think this spectrum reference should remain optional. We cannot 
provide it (at least not correctly) for PKL and MGF to mzML conversion.
On the other hand, I agree that the SRM transitions could be more 
efficiently described. Maybe you could exemplify how you would do it 
using CV terms?

Fredrik

Matthew Chambers skrev:
> It is unclear whether the precursor must have a spectrum reference 
> (either internal or external) for semantic validation. If it is 
> required, we cannot use the current precursor structure to indicate the 
> Q1 selected mz for SRM spectra. I would rather make the precursor 
> spectrum reference obligatory (for semantic validation) and then use 
> single (vastly more space-efficient) CV terms to indicate the Q1 and Q3 
> values for SRM spectra.
>
> Thoughts?
> -Matt
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>