[Story]: Mix unitized value and ontology term logic

[HLWeil]

As a

Metadata annotator

I want to

annotate the temperature at which I grew my plants. Besides applying 37° Celsius to one sample, I applied RT to another sample and for the third sample, I could not get a measurement. I want to describe all three cases using controlled vocabularies.

So that

This is currently not doable using Swate (any maybe even ISA-Tab/ISA-XLSX), because it enforces the same unit for all values of a column. But I think in my case, describing the second and third sample using ontology terms has the benefit of added information.

E.g.:

[HLWeil]

Is this a case we should be covering with our tooling, @CMR248 @Brilator @muehlhaus? Or should we keep it as is and enforce either uniform numeric or uniform term values?

[Brilator]

1. "NA", "NULL", or blank cell should be allowed for "unknown".
2. RT is often assumed as 25 °C. So pragmatically I would add 25. It doesn't get any less / more precise than "room temperature".

[Brilator]

More importantly, why is this a "user story"? :D

[HLWeil]

1. "NA", "NULL", or blank cell should be allowed for "unknown".
2. RT is often assumed as 25 °C. So pragmatically I would add 25. It doesn't get any less / more precise than "room temperature".

I see the practicality of the solutions you provided. But you do lose some information when solving it like this. If the experimenter just lets his control plants grow without measuring or applying a specific temperature, "room temperature" would be the most accurate annotation. Room temperature might be 25°C or 20°C and in this case either could be a wrong assumption.

[HLWeil]

More importantly, why is this a "user story"? :D

Just wasn't quite sure about where to put this question. It's not necessarily only a SWATE issue in my opinion.