development poster

[J Clark]

Hi,

David and I have volunteered the development interest group to 
contribute a poster for the GO Consortium meeting. :-)

I have submitted an abstract:

The development interest group has been working intensively for several 
years to improve the development node. Current projects include 
improvements to the neurogenesis section and cleanup of all the standard 
terms under 'development' to ensure correspondance to the standard DAG 
structure and standard definitions. We have been considering how best to 
represent the top concept of development, deciding whether this should 
mean 'development of a thing' or 'developmental process' and what the 
long term effects of this will be. An investigation has been made into 
whether the presence of is_a diamonds in the ontologies causes problems, 
and what should be done about this. The cell differentiation section of 
the ontology is also being aligned with the cell type ontology. The 
group has also been looking forward at how the terms can best be used in 
future, including the possible use of cross products. This poster will 
give a brief intorduction to some of the work that has been done, and 
that may be happening in the future.


Also a possible division of labour in poster construction:
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Doug: Improvements to the neurogenesis section (Just wrote to Doug to 
ask if he's keen to do this.)

Jen: cleanup of all the standard terms under 'development' to ensure 
correspondance to the standard DAG structure and standard definitions.

Jen: 'development of a thing' v. 'developmental process' (I have been 
discussing this with Jane as she is making the complete is_a path in 
component, and we have got some interesting thoughts. She's keen that we 
should have both 'developmental process' and 'development of a thing' so 
we can have is_a and part_of paths. I'd be interested to try to explain 
that possible approach in the poster.

David: is_a diamonds

Jen: cell differentiation section of the ontology is also being aligned 
with the cell type ontology. (I think maybe my PAG slides could be used 
for this)

David: cross products.

Does anybody else want to contribute other sections for the poster, or 
help with the sections we have?

Thanks,

Jen