[Bioperl-l] Bio::Ontology overhaul

[Ewan Birney]

>
> But - if the majority of people agrees with you, then the problem is
> solved.
>
> Guys/gals on the list, please vote: ontology accessible from a term, or
> the plain name of the ontology suffices?
>

I am happy to go with hilmar's suggestion for the moment, and then if this
causes hideous issues, back it out v. quickly.


My sense is that down the 1.2 branch, ontologies will only be used in the
context of biosql and probably well defined. On the main trunk however I
think we have to embrace ontologies for seqfeature types (as the semantic
win is so great... pardon the pun) which says that we should have
developer releases (1.3 etc) and really pound on it...