Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make changes to "Add annoton" wizard behavior in graph editor for restrictions and input #473

Closed
cmungall opened this issue Aug 23, 2017 · 5 comments

Comments

@cmungall
Copy link
Member

These changes will make the add-annoton more similar to simple annoton editor, and also clarify #471

  • enabled_by: leave as-is, including ability to force in CURIE (this is option 1 of Allow annotation of any UniProtKB identifier #471)
  • MF:
    • restrict to MF ontology (or at least eliminate ability to force in CURIE).
    • keep behavior whereby blank entry -> root node with enables
  • BP:
    • restrict to BP ontology (or at least eliminate ability to force in CURIE).
    • if blank, don't add any individuals (rather than root instance as it is now)
  • CC:
    • restrict to CC ontology (or at least eliminate ability to force in CURIE).
    • if blank, don't add any individuals (rather than root instance as it is now)

I think we can also remove add-function and add-process wizards

@kltm kltm added this to the wishlist milestone Aug 23, 2017
@kltm
Copy link
Member

kltm commented Aug 23, 2017

To clarify, would a correct reformulation of "restrict to X ontology (or at least eliminate ability to force in CURIE)" be "restrict to X ontology and eliminate ability to force in CURIE"?

@kltm kltm changed the title Changes to add-annoton wizard behavior Make changes to "Add annoton" wizard behavior in graph editor for restrictions and input Aug 23, 2017
@cmungall
Copy link
Member Author

To clarify, would a correct reformulation of "restrict to X ontology (or at least eliminate ability to force in CURIE)" be "restrict to X ontology and eliminate ability to force in CURIE"?

correct.

@kltm
Copy link
Member

kltm commented Aug 24, 2017

Part of the issue here is that this is essentially undocumented behavior. I'll maybe try to add something to the UI that will indicate that users can indeed do (or not do) this.

@cmungall
Copy link
Member Author

Suggested placeholder attributes:

  • GP: "GP ID or autocomplete"
  • MF/BP/CC: search for term

@kltm
Copy link
Member

kltm commented Aug 24, 2017

No text changes (would require reworking panel a little) and leaving in the BP and CC sections for now.
Otherwise, lightly tested and pushed into production.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants