#257 Missing Biological Qualifier

closed
nobody
5
2014-06-11
2013-12-18
No

There is a new Biological Qualifier 'hasTaxon' listed on the qualifier site http://www.ebi.ac.uk/miriam/main/qualifiers/ that is not mentioned in our Table 8 on Page 91 of the L3V1 spec.

Presumably this qualifier did not exist when the spec was produced but L3V2 needs to remember to add it.

Discussion

  • Sarah Keating

    Sarah Keating - 2013-12-18
    • Group: Accept-conformance-implications --> Reported-Proposed
     
  • Lucian Smith

    Lucian Smith - 2014-04-04
    • labels: --> Level 3 Version 1 Core
     
  • Lucian Smith

    Lucian Smith - 2014-04-04
     
  • Lucian Smith

    Lucian Smith - 2014-04-04

    This hadn't had the l3v1 tag, so it was missed in my initial sweep. Unfortunately, even thought it's straightforward, it can't quite be classified as a typo, so you all need to vote on it; I think it has conformance implications.

     
  • Lucian Smith

    Lucian Smith - 2014-04-04
     
  • Michael Hucka

    Michael Hucka - 2014-04-04

    I accept this issue as valid, and the proposed solution.

     
  • Nicolas Le Novère

    I accept this issue as valid, and the proposed solution.

     
  • Dagmar Waltemath

    I accept this issue as valid, and the proposed solution.

     
  • Brett Olivier

    Brett Olivier - 2014-04-07

    I agree with the proposed change, and it should be done.

     
  • Frank Bergmann

    Frank Bergmann - 2014-04-07

    Could we not add this Taxon in another Release of L3V1? Sort of as a 'missed' element to be listed? As such it could be easily added via an Errata, and would not need to wait for a new version.

    I accept this issue as valid.

     
    • Michael Hucka

      Michael Hucka - 2014-04-07

      It could be done that way too.

       
  • Brett Olivier

    Brett Olivier - 2014-04-11

    +1 for doing this as soon as possible. Other people are probably more diligent than me but when implementing MIRIAM support I automatically used their list of qualifiers ... assuming they were valid in SBML as well.

     
  • Lucian Smith

    Lucian Smith - 2014-05-29

    Enough editors have agreed that we should do this; changing it to 'accepted'.

     
  • Lucian Smith

    Lucian Smith - 2014-05-29
    • status: open --> accepted
    • Group: Reported-Proposed --> Accept-conformance-implications
     
  • Lucian Smith

    Lucian Smith - 2014-06-11

    Added L2v4 to this issue, and added it to SVN for both. This change will be incorporated into the forthcoming L2v5 and L3v2 specifications.

     
  • Lucian Smith

    Lucian Smith - 2014-06-11
    • labels: Level 3 Version 1 Core --> Level 3 Version 1 Core, Level 2 Version 4
    • status: accepted --> closed
     

Log in to post a comment.

Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.

Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:





No, thanks