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

New Bridge Documentation #20

Open
5 of 7 tasks
shawntanzk opened this issue Apr 29, 2022 · 3 comments
Open
5 of 7 tasks

New Bridge Documentation #20

shawntanzk opened this issue Apr 29, 2022 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@shawntanzk
Copy link
Collaborator

shawntanzk commented Apr 29, 2022

This is a ticket to document what I am doing so we remember

  • Add ok terms from expert curated CCF_to_UBERON list to new bridge template as equivalent
  • Go through expert curated CCF_to_UBERON list manually and add expert mapped terms
    • For terms that are 'add layer' or I am unsure, I use subclass part of instead of equivalent
  • Build template to new bridge, merge mba and dmba bridge, run robot diff on them
  • Manually go through robot diff and add back terms that are not flagged as nok or verify in expert list back into template, annotating source as Chris Mungall for those
  • Compare fixed bridge file from previous to original bridge file, and for axioms that match, annotate source as Chris Mungall
  • Add new terms needed
@shawntanzk shawntanzk self-assigned this Apr 29, 2022
@shawntanzk
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Looks like everything that was removed from original bridge file was rightly removed - they were either nok or there was no mappings to them yet.
For safety I'd rather not add back verify too - do you agree with this @patrick-lloyd-ray

@shawntanzk
Copy link
Collaborator Author

New bridge files: https://github.com/obophenotype/ABA_Uberon/tree/new_bridge/src/ontology/new-bridges
Note: they have extra labels on them (can remove, there for ease for me in template)

@patrick-lloyd-ray
Copy link
Collaborator

For safety I'd rather not add back verify too

Yes, that's a good idea.

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

2 participants