[Ontology-editors] use of regulates

[Midori Harris]

I think this would be fine. Disjointness only applies to is_a, and we 
already have lots of cellular processes that are (sometimes indirectly)
part_of some MCOP or MOP. There are probably also regulates examples, but 
I would have to search to make sure.

We might want 'regulation of cAMP-mediated signaling' anyway if there 
would be any other children besides the modulation by host etc. one.

m

On Thu, 31 Jul 2008, Jane Lomax wrote:

> Also, can I make regulates relationships directly between the MOP terms and 
> non-MOP process terms? For example:
>
> modulation by host of symbiont cAMP-mediated signaling -regulates-> 
> cAMP-mediated signaling
>
> Or do I need to make a 'regualtion of cAMP-mediated signaling' term?
>
> Does it matter that 'regualtion of cAMP-mediated signaling' would be a 
> 'regulation of cellular process'? (I know we haven't tried to apply 
> disjointness to any of the regulation terms, but just seems wrong somehow!)
>
> Jane
>
>
>
> Jane Lomax wrote:
>> Hi Chris, David and Tanya - I'm in the midst of creating a load of new 
>> terms for PAMGO, and I'm trying to get the regulates relationships correct 
>> as I go to save pain in the future. It works so differently from the other 
>> all-some relations we use I'm having a hard time getting my head around it.
>> 
>> For example, in a situation where you have a term 'regulation of process X' 
>> but there's no process X in GO, but process X is_a process Y, is it okay to 
>> say that 'regulation of process X' regulates process Y? Or do we have to 
>> create a process X?
>> 
>> Jane
>> 
>
>
>