[Ontology-editors] draft has_part announcement

[Jane Lomax]

Wow. Some of that seems really counterintuitive. Is this really true:

A -neg_regulates-> B -neg_regulates-> C, then A -indirectly 
pos_regulates-> C

?

Either way I think this merits some further discussion so we should 
probably leave out for now...

Jane



David Hill wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> A -regulates-> B -regulates-> C
>>
>> then
>>
>> A -indirectly regulates-> C
>>
>> ?
>>
> Yes.
>
> So here are the rules that fit when we were looking at examples from 
> BP. Tanya will correct me if I'm misremembering.
>
> A -regulates-> B -regulates-> C, then    A -indirectly regulates-> C
>
> A -neg_regulates-> B -neg_regulates-> C, then A -indirectly 
> pos_regulates-> C
>
>
> A -neg_regulates-> B -pos_regulates-> C, then A -indirectly 
> neg_regulates-> C
>
>
> A -pos_regulates-> B -neg_regulates-> C, then A -indirectly 
> neg_regulates-> C
>
>
> A -neg_regulates-> B -regulates-> C, then A -indirectly regulates-> C
>
>
> A -regulates-> B -neg_regulates-> C, then A -indirectly regulates-> C
>
>
> A -pos_regulates-> B -regulates-> C, then A -indirectly regulates-> C
>
>
> A -regulates-> B -pos_regulates-> C, then A -indirectly regulates-> C


-- 
Dr Jane Lomax
GO Editorial Office
EMBL-EBI
Wellcome Trust Genome Campus
Hinxton
Cambridgeshire, UK
CB10 1SD

p: +44 1223 492516
f: +44 1223 494468