Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove all instances of 'directly regulates', 'directly positively regulates' and 'directly negatively regulates #255

Open
pgaudet opened this issue Feb 11, 2021 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #256

Comments

@pgaudet
Copy link
Contributor

pgaudet commented Feb 11, 2021

We have decided not to use those.

Can we remove? Or will that break something ?

@vanaukenk
Copy link
Contributor

Do we have a mechanism to update all the existing models that use these relations, as well as 'directly activates' and 'directly inhibits'?

If not, we will now have a lot of models that are invalid. It'd be good to be able to update things like this programmatically before we remove the relations.

@ukemi
Copy link

ukemi commented Feb 11, 2021

We also need to do at least one other mass replacement of relations. We need to change stand-alone CC annotations that are to cellular anatomical entities to located_in rather than part_of. Annotations to complexes can stay as they are.

@cmungall
Copy link
Member

@pgaudet can you add more context - what meeting was this decided on? What was the rationale? how will models we updated

Will we use causally_upstream_of_[{negative,positive}]_effect in place?

@pgaudet
Copy link
Contributor Author

pgaudet commented Feb 12, 2021

This was decided on GO-CAM modeling calls. We decided that there was no case when we needed to distinguish

Thanks, Pascale

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
4 participants