Closed sbmlsecretary closed 2 years ago
I am accepting this issue as valid.
Original comment by: fbergmann
I am accepting this issue as valid.
Original comment by: mhucka
Original comment by: mhucka
I am accepting this issue as valid.
Original comment by: s_sahle
Original comment by: mhucka
This is clearly an inconsistency in the specification, though I'd say this is more than a typo. There is really no alternative course of action except to amend the SBML code in the way described. Nevertheless, it is conceivable that this has conformance implications because readers might have been misled.
Since there's really no other course of action possible except to modify the SBML examples, and since 3/5 of the editors agree, I'm going to short-circuit the process slightly, and change the status to "Pending" as an accepted issue with conformance implications.
Original comment by: mhucka
Original comment by: sf-robot
This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 730 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker).
Original comment by: sf-robot
Original comment by: mhucka
Original comment by: luciansmith
It looks like this was corrected for l3v1, but still needs to be incorporated to l2v5. Since it used to be 'Pending' I'm going to re-set it to 'Pending'.
Original comment by: luciansmith
Original comment by: luciansmith
Fixed in SVN for L2v5, and will be part of the forthcoming release of that specification.
Original comment by: luciansmith
The sbml for examples 7.4 and 7.5 does not declare reversible="false" on the reactions. However, the text explaining the examples uses irreversible reactions.
Reported by: sarahkeating
Original Ticket: "sbml/sbml-specifications//141":https://sourceforge.net/p/sbml/sbml-specifications//141