The spec could be better standardized

adrienrougny commented 6 years ago

A number of elements could be better standardized, i.e. all written or drawn using the same word/style throughout the spec:

label, container, and auxiliary entries
style of SBGN in figures (e.g sometimes there is a space between nodes and arcs, sometimes not)
legend of figures

amazein commented 6 years ago

I agree, it would be nice to unify the style, keep all the figures in different formats so they can be modified when needed.

adrienrougny commented 6 years ago

Editors call 18/4/30: for figures, we should use SBGN-ED.

In SBGN-ED:

An equivalence operator can be drawn by first drawing a logical operator node, and then changing its label to "\\&Xi"

A stadium shaped state variable can be drawn by first drawing a normal (ellipse shaped) state variable, then changing its shape to "capsule frame" in the Attributes -> Node -> Label (Annotation) -> Text drop-down list

For these two cases, graphml files can be correctly edited again, but not SBGN-ML files (SBGN-ML files would show the initial operator for the first case, and no state variable in the second case).

sbgn / process-descriptions

The spec could be better standardized #206