I would suggest just removing the PATO reference completely. I don’t
believe that saying a “negative scan” IS A “electric charge” is
semantically correct
*From:* mayerg97 [mailto:ger...@ru...]
*Sent:* Thursday, November 24, 2016 12:53 AM
*To:* psi...@li...;
psi...@li...; psi...@li...
*Subject:* [Psidev-ms-dev] Release candidate 4.0.5_rc1 of psi-ms.obo
Dear proteomics community,
attached there's the release candidate 4.0.5_rc1 of the psi-ms.obo file.
It contains a changed is_a relation for two terms, since
PATO:0002186 defines the polarity (polar/nonpolar) and not
the electric charge (negative/positive/neutral) defined by PATO:0002193
Changed CV terms in version 4.0.5_rc1 of psi-ms.obo:
====================================================
************ Changed is_a: PATO:0002186 ! polarity
************ to is_a: PATO:0002193 ! electric charge
[Term]
id: MS:1000129
name: negative scan
def: "Polarity of the scan is negative." [PSI:MS]
is_a: PATO:0002193 ! electric charge
is_a: MS:1000465 ! scan polarity
is_a: MS:1000808 ! chromatogram attribute
[Term]
id: MS:1000130
name: positive scan
def: "Polarity of the scan is positive." [PSI:MS]
is_a: PATO:0002193 ! electric charge
is_a: MS:1000465 ! scan polarity
is_a: MS:1000808 ! chromatogram attribute
Best Regards,
Gerhard
--
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
*Dipl. Inform. med., Dipl. Wirtsch. Inf. GERHARD MAYER*
*PhD student*
*Medizinisches Proteom-Center*
*DEPARTMENT Medical Bioinformatics*
*Building *ZKF E.049a | Universitätsstraße 150 | D-44801 Bochum
*Fon *+49 (0)234 32-21006 | *Fax *+49 (0)234 32-14554
*E-mail *ger...@ru...
www.medizinisches-proteom-center.de
|
