[Ontology-editors] haspart documentation (meeting with Chris (fwd))

[Harold Drabkin]

This seems very clear and is a great help.
h

Amelia Ireland wrote:
>
> On Jun 12, 2009, at 2:50 AM, Midori Harris wrote:
>
>> Hi Amelia,
>>
>> If you read the minutes from yesterday carefully, you'll notice that 
>> we volunteered you to write documentation for the has_part 
>> relationship. because Chris told us you had started on it, but put it 
>> on hold when the F-P link team opted for part_of. Now that we've 
>> decide to revive has_part and get it into CC (and BP not too long 
>> after), the documentation is percolating back up the priority heap.
>>
>> Once the documentation is up, we'll announce it on GO Friends and 
>> I'll get on with the test case.
>
>
> http://www.ebi.ac.uk/~aji/go/GO.ontology.relationships.shtml
>
> Questions:
>
> - are those examples OK?
>
> - should I make more of the difference between "has part" and "part 
> of", and that one is from the perspective of the child, whereas the 
> other is from the perspective of the parent?
>
> - have any colours been thought of for the "has part" link?
>
> - in the has-part diagrams, I tried to make a visual difference 
> between the "ALL x ... y" and "SOME x ... y" rules. Does it make it 
> any clearer, or should I just redo those diagrams in the standard style?
>
> Cheers,
> Amelia.
>
> -- 
> Amelia Ireland
> GO Editorial Office
> http://www.berkeleybop.org || http://www.ebi.ac.uk
> BBOP Plant Project: http://bbopgarden.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ontology-editors mailing list
> Ontology-editors at geneontology.org
> http://fafner.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/ontology-editors