[Electron-transport] one more addition

[Gwinn Giglio, Michelle]

Hi Jen,

I don't think this is a good idea.  I think it just recreates one of the
problems we were trying to get rid of by reworking the old electron
transport term.  People will start annotating stuff to this term that they
shouldn't.  Also I agree with Peter, it is not transport like the other
transport terms are.

I can't seem to find a list of the terms in question here, I'm likely
looking in the wrong places - could you send an example or two?

Thanks,
Michelle


On 3/17/08 7:27 AM, "Jennifer Deegan (nee Clark)" <jdeegan at ebi.ac.uk> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I am making last minute preparations for the commit of our electron
> transport work, which will take place on wednesday.
> 
> I found that some of the terms that are parts of photosynthetic electron
> transport don't have an is_a path to the root (which they must have
> before I can commit). To solve this problem I have made a new term
> 'electron transport', which is a direct child of the process 'transport'.
> 
> This means that in the commit we will be obsoleting the old term
> 'electron transport' that used to roughly represent the respiratory
> electron transport chain, and replacing it with:
> 
> [i]electron transport chain ; GO:new
> ---[i]respiratory electron transport chain ; GO:new
> ---[i]photosynthetic electron transport chain ; GO:new
> 
> and that we will also be creating a new child of transport:
> 
> [i]transport ; GO:0006810
> ---[i]electron transport ; GO:new
> 
> electron transport ; GO:new
> def: The directed movement of electrons into, out of, within or between
> cells.
> 
> The terms under photosynthetic electron transport chain ; GO:new
> that did not previously have an is_a path to the root will then have an
> is_a path to the root via
> electron transport ; GO:new.
> 
> Does this all seem okay with everyone?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jen
> 
>