[Ontology-editors] bp_xp_vetted_mah (fwd)

[Midori Harris]

fyi, in light of Jen's question

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 11:22:41 -0800
From: Chris Mungall <cjm at berkeleybop.org>
To: Midori Harris <midori at ebi.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: bp_xp_vetted_mah


ok, the default is now the vetted. The one labeled *-unvetted is currently a 
union of vetted + unvetted, but I'll change this so that it is uniquely 
unvetted

 	/share/go/cvs/go/scratch/xps/biological_process_xp_cellular_component-unvetted.obo,v 
<--  biological_process_xp_cellular_component-unvetted.obo
initial revision: 1.1
/share/go/cvs/go/scratch/xps/biological_process_xp_cellular_component.obo,v 
<--  biological_process_xp_cellular_component.obo
new revision: 1.46; previous revision: 1.45
/share/go/cvs/go/scratch/xps/biological_process_xp_chebi.obo,v  <-- 
biological_process_xp_chebi.obo
new revision: 1.7; previous revision: 1.6
/share/go/cvs/go/scratch/xps/bp_xp_cc_vetted_mah.obo,v  <-- 
bp_xp_cc_vetted_mah.obo
new revision: delete; previous revision: 1.4


On Feb 7, 2009, at 1:41 AM, Midori Harris wrote:

> fine by me; I just put the vetted ones in a new file 'cos I didn't want to 
> mess with the existing files. happy to switch over whenever you like.
> 
> m
> 
> On Fri, 6 Feb 2009, Chris Mungall wrote:
> 
>> just noticed this - I'd rather the vetted one was the default one.
>> 
>> perhaps we could move
>> 
>> bp_xp_vetted_mah -> biological_process_xp_cellular_component
>> 
>> then put all the dodgy ones in a separate file; eg 
>> biological_process_xp_cellular_component-unvetted . I would put new obol 
>> results in the seperate file & they would gradually work their way over