Closed i3hsInnovation closed 2 years ago
I was thinking about this as well @ifokkema. The start and end positions are already mapped. It would then just be a case of adding the exon boundaries into the existing dictionary.
I agree that this would be simpler. VariantValidator could then just return the exon position as agreed
"primary_assembly_loci": {
"grch37": {
"hgvs_genomic_description": "NC_000017.10:g.48275363C>A",
"vcf": {
"alt": "A",
"chr": "17",
"pos": "48275363",
"ref": "C"
},
"exonic_location":
{"start": "X/Y",
"end": "X/Y"
},
Then to genes2transcripts I'll add the exon structures too so that you can do whatever the hell you want with it ;). Definately agree this makes more sense given the current function available.
genes to transcripts endpoint then becomes
{
"current_name": "collagen type I alpha 1 chain",
"current_symbol": "COL1A1",
"previous_name": "collagen, type I, alpha 1",
"previous_symbol": "COL1A1",
"transcripts": [
{
"coding_end": 4521,
"coding_start": 127,
"description": "Homo sapiens collagen type I alpha 1 chain (COL1A1), mRNA",
"genomic_spans": {
"NC_000017.10": {
"end_position": 48279000,
"start_position": 48261457
"exonic_structure":
[[tx_start, tx_end, geno_start, geno_end], [............]],
},
This is definately my preference. Also very easy to code up. All OK with that?????
If so I will upgrade genes2transcripts today because I want to code for a while. Been doing too much teaching 👍
Picked up here for adding exon structure https://github.com/openvar/variantValidator/issues/253
@beboche and @ifokkema please take a look and provide comments.
Then to genes2transcripts I'll add the exon structures too so that you can do whatever the hell you want with it ;). Definately agree this makes more sense given the current function available.
Excellent!
If so I will upgrade genes2transcripts today because I want to code for a while. Been doing too much teaching +1
Ah haha I hope you had fun :smile:
We have had several requests to provide exon numbering. I have always avoided this because it is a total mine field
Although this is a seemingly trivial thing to do but it is actually hugely complicated because of how people like to number exons. For example,
I would like to gather user requirements around this.