ZFIN annotations are not free of redundancy. For example, we occasionally have annotations to somite, and on other cases somite and part of trunk. Unfortunately, somite is ALWAYS part of trunk (ZFA). The problem is, since we rely on the annotations to be logically distinct, we generate both classes: inheres in somite, and inheres in somite part of trunk, which are logically equivalent and therefore redundant and confusing. For ZP, as a workaround, we remove part of axioms from ZFA prior to generating the ontology. But that wont really help us, when ZP is combined with other ontologies.
Do you think it makes sense to fix these annotations at ZFIN @ybradford annotations;
ZFIN annotations are not free of redundancy. For example, we occasionally have annotations to
somite
, and on other casessomite and part of trunk
. Unfortunately,somite
is ALWAYS part of trunk (ZFA). The problem is, since we rely on the annotations to be logically distinct, we generate both classes:inheres in somite
, andinheres in somite part of trunk
, which are logically equivalent and therefore redundant and confusing. For ZP, as a workaround, we remove part of axioms from ZFA prior to generating the ontology. But that wont really help us, when ZP is combined with other ontologies.Do you think it makes sense to fix these annotations at ZFIN @ybradford annotations;