[DAS] querying for nonpositional annotations
jw12 at sanger.ac.uk
Mon Aug 2 09:45:50 UTC 2010
I'm not sure I agree with returning all annotations for every tiny
part of a sequence requested.
If you consider DAS to be used for visual display mainly - then it
seems a bit ridiculous to return all publications related to a segment
(take a case where you have many publications related to a protein
sequence). If publications aren't asked for i.e. non-positional
annotations then I don't think they should be given. So I guess I'm
agreeing with Jim here.
Given the history of DAS I would propose a non-positional parameter as
apposed to "positional".
I think we have to remember that the 1.6 spec is supposed to mainly be
a consolidation of the way DAS is being used and DAS is supposed to be
simple (or not overly technical and difficult to pick up anyway).
However- obviously we don't want to propagate practices that really
don't make sense. The 0,0 thing is a hack like we had hacks for
ontologies which now for 1.6 we have cvIds (I think are a big
improvement). So we need something that is simple and obvious for a
big all encompassing thing like positional vs non-positional.
On 2 Aug 2010, at 09:50, Leyla Garcia wrote:
> *Hi list,
> *>No magic numbers.
> *According to discussions on this matter, I will change MyDas
> behaviour so 0 will be no
> "magic number" any more,
> *>Types can be used for filtering, and actually you get more fine-
> grained control than simply positional or non-positional. (I use
> this technique now in DASher.) *
>> In my opinion, the current spec as written is correct. That is, non-
>> positional features don't just apply to the whole sequence, they
>> apply to any part of the sequence.
>> As an example, consider a journal reference --- a particular
>> protein was isolated by a lab, they wrote a paper about it, and
>> deposited the protein sequence in a database. If you look at a
>> subsequence of the protein sequence, that subsequence still derives
>> from the paper, right? So therefore the feature containing that
>> journal reference should still be attached to the subsequence.
>> On that basis, I think the uniprot server is technically doing it
>> wrong and should be changed, although I have to say that in
>> practice it hasn't been an issue for me.
> *and non-positional features will be always returned.
> Since UniProt is built upon MyDas, its behaviour will change as well.
> DAS mailing list
> DAS at lists.open-bio.org
Senior Developer and DAS coordinator
jw12 at sanger.ac.uk
Telephone: 01223 492314
The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research
Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a
company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered
office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE.
More information about the DAS