Oct 11th, 2016 Ontology Working Group Meeting - Revision history

Cooperl: /* Agenda */

2016-10-24T22:06:28Z

Agenda

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:06, 24 October 2016
Line 12:		Line 12:

	=Agenda=		=Agenda=
	~~==spine root terms for PO==~~


	~~==lenticel question for PO==~~

	==New Taxon constraints added to PO==		==New Taxon constraints added to PO==
	* Prototype taxon constraints have been added to the Plant Ontology		* Prototype taxon constraints have been added to the Plant Ontology

2016-10-14T17:29:03Z

Upcoming Meetings and Workshops

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:29, 14 October 2016
Line 101:		Line 101:

	= Upcoming Meetings and Workshops=		= Upcoming Meetings and Workshops=
	==IC-FOODS Conference November 7-9,2016 Davis, California ==		==IC-FOODS Conference November 7-9, 2016 Davis, California ==
	* http://www.ic-foods.org/conference		* http://www.ic-foods.org/conference
	* Matthew Lange is organizing		* Matthew Lange is organizing

2016-10-12T21:04:44Z

Review of Content- what needs to be saved?

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:04, 12 October 2016
Line 91:		Line 91:
	From CM (by email):		From CM (by email):
	* I think it may be worthwhile doing a quick alignment of content and figuring out what is worth preserving and what is not		* I think it may be worthwhile doing a quick alignment of content and figuring out what is worth preserving and what is not
	* For example in http://plantontology.org/node/5		* For example in http://archive.plantontology.org/node/5
	** Plant Ontology development guidelines -- mostly out of date. Point to README-editors instead		** Plant Ontology development guidelines -- mostly out of date. Point to README-editors instead
	** Ontology relationship types -- this is not useful for most users, it's redundant with what is in RO. You could point to the RO view in AmiGO here		** Ontology relationship types -- this is not useful for most users, it's redundant with what is in RO. You could point to the RO view in AmiGO here

2016-10-12T20:26:40Z

Redirect from old Plant Ontology Site

@@ Line 88: / Line 88: @@
 === Review of Content- what needs to be saved?===
 * PO anatomy glossary- can this be set up on the Planteome site?
 = Upcoming Meetings and Workshops=

2016-10-12T18:00:07Z

Redirect from old Plant Ontology Site

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:00, 12 October 2016
Line 85:		Line 85:
	* the former dev and beta sites redirect to http://dev.planteome.org/amigo		* the former dev and beta sites redirect to http://dev.planteome.org/amigo
	* For updates, follow http://planteome.org		* For updates, follow http://planteome.org

			=== Review of Content- what needs to be saved?===
			* PO anatomy glossary- can this be set up on the Planteome site?

	= Upcoming Meetings and Workshops=		= Upcoming Meetings and Workshops=

2016-10-12T17:52:28Z

Redirect from old Plant Ontology Site

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:52, 12 October 2016
Line 83:		Line 83:
	* All traffic on http://plantontology.org to has been redirected to http://planteome.org		* All traffic on http://plantontology.org to has been redirected to http://planteome.org
	* The main drupal site has been renamed http://archive.plantontology.org/ including the Amigo browser, so you can still visit it		* The main drupal site has been renamed http://archive.plantontology.org/ including the Amigo browser, so you can still visit it
			* the former dev and beta sites redirect to http://dev.planteome.org/amigo
	* For updates, follow http://planteome.org		* For updates, follow http://planteome.org

2016-10-11T22:38:22Z

Harmonization between TO and PO

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:38, 11 October 2016
Line 65:		Line 65:
	# Use the fields: subClassOf instead of equivalentClass for the design pattern (DP) when narrow synonyms		# Use the fields: subClassOf instead of equivalentClass for the design pattern (DP) when narrow synonyms

			* Related question: should all the CO classes have a taxon constraint? Or only the classes with a species-specific entity (i.e. synonyms narrow or broad) should have one?

	* ~~Related question~~: should ~~all the CO classes have a taxon constraint? Or only~~ the ~~classes with a species-specific entity (i~~.e. ~~synonyms narrow or broad) should have one?~~		* ''discussion with PJ after the call: we will go with the first option- Add the fruit types to the PO as separate terms. Ideally we should reinstate the alt ids as their original term, but that may be lost in history. First SVN entry is Apr 25th 2005, and at that point they were already merged.''

	== CO mappings ==		== CO mappings ==

2016-10-11T19:59:49Z

Biocuration 2017, March 23-26, 2017

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:59, 11 October 2016
Line 111:		Line 111:
	* early bird registrations till Nov. 15th- [https://ww2.eventrebels.com/er/Registration/StepRegInfo.jsp?ActivityID=18283&StepNumber=1 Registration Link]		* early bird registrations till Nov. 15th- [https://ww2.eventrebels.com/er/Registration/StepRegInfo.jsp?ActivityID=18283&StepNumber=1 Registration Link]

	==Biocuration 2017, March 23-26, 2017==		==Biocuration 2017, March 26-29, 2017==
	* Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, United States		* Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, United States
	* http://biocuration2017.org		* http://biocuration2017.org

2016-10-11T19:41:07Z

Suggest adding a new relation between the morphology trait and a quality trait

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:41, 11 October 2016
Line 51:		Line 51:

	* maybe we can use [http://www.ontobee.org/ontology/RO?iri=http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/RO_0002326 contributes_to]		* maybe we can use [http://www.ontobee.org/ontology/RO?iri=http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/RO_0002326 contributes_to]
			* if and only if exists c', p' c part_of c' and c' capable_of p and c capable_of p' and p' part_of p then c contributes_to p

	== Harmonization between TO and PO ==		== Harmonization between TO and PO ==

2016-10-11T19:39:25Z

Suggest adding a new relation between the morphology trait and a quality trait

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:39, 11 October 2016
Line 49:		Line 49:
	* is_a pericarp morphology trait (TO:0000945)		* is_a pericarp morphology trait (TO:0000945)
	* is_a fruit quality trait (TO:0002728)		* is_a fruit quality trait (TO:0002728)

			* maybe we can use [http://www.ontobee.org/ontology/RO?iri=http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/RO_0002326 contributes_to]

	== Harmonization between TO and PO ==		== Harmonization between TO and PO ==