Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add a variant of the obsoletion workflow to add OBSOLETE to definition #71

Open
cmungall opened this issue Mar 27, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Comments

@cmungall
Copy link
Contributor

When GO obsoletes a term the string OBSOLETE is added to the definition:

https://wiki.geneontology.org/Ontology_meeting_2024-04-08#Obsoletion

Some ontologies adopt this, others don't. Some do it half hearted. E.g. half of CL obsoletions have this and half don't. This kind of random patchwork confuses users.

In contrast OBO ontologies will always include obsolete in the label

This issue is to gather feedback from different ontologies about what their preferred policy is for this. Ideally we can achieve consensus and have a single KGCL workflow for all ontologies. I think this is best for users, as well as for maintenance. If not, then we can make this configurable.

My own preference is to keep things simple. "obsolete" in the label is sufficient. The definition is not necessarily obsolete. But the GO editors may have reasons to keep this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant