[Ontology-editors] XP file

[Jennifer Deegan (nee Clark)]

Hi Midori,

> What Chris did with my BP-CC xps is create a new file for the ones that 
> *haven't* passed muster as fully checked. (I'll find the relevant email 
> and forward it.) His plan is to convert the file with the original name 
> into the file for fully vetted xps, but that hasn't been done yet. At 
> the moment they're still in the go/scratch/xps/ directory, and I'm 
> inclined to leave all the xp file there at least until we have another 
> chat with Chris (mhich maybe we should do soon).

That's good to know. I have three categories just now:

1) Really problematic stanzas (100)
2) Stanzas that are almost certainly correct but have not yet had the 
graph checked right to the root. (650)
3) Totally checked terms. (0)

I have a file called '[usual name]-notes' with the really problematic 
ones, and also the main file that still contains all of the stanzas. It 
sounds as if the thing for me to do just now is to make a file for my 
own use in scratch where I can note the fully checked stanzas.

Many of the serious problems that I see are common to several of the 
terms, and I am gradually compiling a summary for each common problem to 
put to the group. Each of these problems will need a policy decision 
from the group before I can proceed. If there is time for a conference 
call sometime soon then that would help me advance much faster.

> 
> Specifically, in go/scratch/xps/ Chris added 
> biological_process_xp_cellular_component-unvetted.obo, and intends to 
> strip anything that appears in that file from 
> biological_process_xp_cellular_component.obo; I presume you can copy 
> your difficult stanzas into a new file with an '-unvetted.obo' name.

Sounds good. I'll do that.

> Chris - are you still planning to eliminate duplication between 
> whatever-xps-.obo and whatever-xps-unvetted.obo, or should we work on that?

I'll sign up to that question too.

Jen