https://github.com/PavlidisLab/Gemma/issues/716 outlines a use case for uPheno which seems obvious to people who hear about uPheno: provide a "unified view" on species-specific phenotype ontologies. The issue reviews certain problems with our communication:
People think of uPheno1 as uPheno which is really bad - we need to improvise our messaging here.
"Unified" suggests that the problem of having the exact same term in HP and MP is somehow solved - which it is analytically by declaring them equivalent, but this does not automatically explain to people like Paul (the issuer) how curators should make the call. Its easy to say "if it is a human, use HP, if it is a non-human mammal, use MP" but the reality is that there will be terms in MP that sound like they could be in HP, but are not, and people may want to use those to describe their, well, human data.
I think we should develop a clearer SOP, and a clearer
@rays22 maybe we can start putting together a Google docs for a use case analysis of uPheno, and find people to present about the use cases. These calls can also be used to prioritise our work moving forward. @udp @sbello @rays22 one idea would be to make the uPheno biweekly call fluctuate between editors meetings and user meetings. For every user meeting we can invite a new stakeholder, and invite anyone interested to contribute. @sabrinatoro can give advice on how to go about organising this, since she is doing a great job for that in Mondo.
Sorry I just realised a created a mixed issue here, one about the specific problem above, and one about starting an outreach group. Lets keep this issue for the use case above, and discuss the outreach group in the google docs @rays22 will prepare.
https://github.com/PavlidisLab/Gemma/issues/716 outlines a use case for uPheno which seems obvious to people who hear about uPheno: provide a "unified view" on species-specific phenotype ontologies. The issue reviews certain problems with our communication:
I think we should develop a clearer SOP, and a clearer
@rays22 maybe we can start putting together a Google docs for a use case analysis of uPheno, and find people to present about the use cases. These calls can also be used to prioritise our work moving forward. @udp @sbello @rays22 one idea would be to make the uPheno biweekly call fluctuate between editors meetings and user meetings. For every user meeting we can invite a new stakeholder, and invite anyone interested to contribute. @sabrinatoro can give advice on how to go about organising this, since she is doing a great job for that in Mondo.
Sorry I just realised a created a mixed issue here, one about the specific problem above, and one about starting an outreach group. Lets keep this issue for the use case above, and discuss the outreach group in the google docs @rays22 will prepare.