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

[Midori Harris]

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, Amelia Ireland wrote:

>
> On Jun 16, 2009, at 4:14 AM, Midori Harris wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Amelia Ireland wrote:
>> 
>>> - are those examples OK?
>> 
>> They're probably OK, but it might be safest to run them by some of our 
>> prokaryote experts (Michelle, Jim, Debby, etc.). In the past everyone 
>> thought chromatin was a eukaryote-specific feature, and although that seems 
>> to be changing, I did a quick-n-dirty Google search, and found that there 
>> are still at least a few sources that say bacteria don't have chromatin 
>> (e.g. PMID:17148507). I don't know whether you think that's enough reason 
>> to choose different examples.
>
> I was a bit dubious of the "has part" examples - I started questioning the 
> logic behind it and then it seemed I could only come up with examples that 
> shouldn't be "has part"! If there are any really nice obvious (i.e. that 
> people will have heard of) "has part" examples, they would be most gratefully 
> received - particularly for "A has part B has part C".

Somewhat at a loss for examples using existing terms ...

I may be able to make something of some of the terms requested in SF 
2784316, along with existing snRNP complex terms. I should have time to 
pay attention to it tomorrow, but follow the SF link if you want to see 
for yourself in the meantime:

https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2784316&group_id=36855&atid=440764

m