Open caetera opened 2 weeks ago
After some discussion on the PSI-MS call, we decide to move "combined dissociation method" so it is not a child of "dissociation method", which is not the best, but automatically disallows use of these two combined terms in mzML.
To add some more detail here from the discussion:
There isn't a way for the mzML validator to express a "may not" rule in the format it uses, in-so-far as I can tell, hence the re-parenting.
Thanks for looking into it. To confirm, two separate terms (for example, ETD
+ supplementary CID
) should be used in mzML, while the combined terms (ETciD
) are meant to be used for other applications, for example, SDRF.
Correct.
Describe the question or discussion
Using the current PSI-MS CV, ETci(hc)D fragmentation can be represented in two seemingly equivalent ways. For example, for denoting ETciD it is possible to use
MS:1003182
, or a combination ofMS:1000598
(ETD) andMS:1002679
(supplementary CID).Is there any use case for supplementary CID/HCD outside ETciD/EThcD? Is there any "correct" way to denote ETciD/EThcD and, if so, shouldn't the "wrong" way be marked as obsolete?
For further context, please, see the following discussions: https://github.com/OpenMS/OpenMS/issues/7499 https://github.com/compomics/ThermoRawFileParser/issues/182