Two partners required when annotating loss of actin filament binding

[PCarme]

The interface indicates it is required to input 2 binding partners when annotating a phenotype as "abolished actin filament binding" (FYPO:0006025), like when annotating for loss of protein-protein interaction.
But it doesn't make much sense to me to be forced to input two binding partners in the case of interaction with actin filaments.

[ValWood]

Agreed, but you can over-ride this in the text interface (I have been over riding, I assume this way, or it is possible the rule is not enforced and one is acceptable) Maybe we should make the requirement non mandatory though.

[PCarme]

Actually it is written as required, but possible to confirm the annotation with just one partner already.

[ValWood]

In this case it might be useful to add actin if that is the binding partner. Although "actin " is in the GO term, if we are doing clever computational stuff later a computer won't be aware that actin = act1, so if you know the binding partner add it even if redundent.

[kimrutherford]

I've changed the configuration so you won't see the "(2 required)" in red. Is the rest of the message OK?:

affected proteins (add TWO, i.e. both binding partners)

[ValWood]

yes!