Right now it's using the has_evidence field to capture the assay and crossReference.id from the Alliance json format, but it probably makes more sense to use qualifier for assay and put the crossReference field into the publication slot.
Looking at the model definition for has_evidence and evidence_type, I think we initially followed the definition of has evidence - a connection to supporting evidence - rather than the range of evidence type, which points to this being a slot for evidence codes.
has evidence:
is_a: association slot
range: evidence type
description: >-
connects an association to an instance of supporting evidence
exact_mappings:
- RO:0002558
multivalued: true
evidence type:
is_a: information content entity
aliases: ['evidence code']
description: >-
Class of evidence that supports an association
values_from:
- eco
exact_mappings:
- ECO:0000000
Right now it's using the
has_evidencefield to capture the assay and crossReference.id from the Alliance json format, but it probably makes more sense to use qualifier for assay and put the crossReference field into the publication slot.Looking at the model definition for has_evidence and evidence_type, I think we initially followed the definition of has evidence - a connection to supporting evidence - rather than the range of evidence type, which points to this being a slot for evidence codes.