Difference between revisions of "Clarification on comments re GeneticReference.sequenceIdentifier"
(Created page with "__NOTOC__ Return to BRIDG ===Need clarification on comments re GeneticReference.sequenceIdentifier (row 28)=== ====Current Definition==== DEFINITION: A unique identifi...") |
|||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
====Responses==== | ====Responses==== | ||
| − | + | DISCUSSION 20160225: LSDAM didn’t bring in that level of detail and given that BRIDG is looking to do modeling by reference in the future, we are deferring this level of change except to amend the note as follows: | |
| + | NOTE(S): The genetic variation may be documented and versioned in a public database or in the protocol document. | ||
| + | |||
| + | UPDATE DONE IN THE MODEL | ||
Return to [[BRIDG]] | Return to [[BRIDG]] | ||
Revision as of 21:49, 25 February 2016
Return to BRIDG
Need clarification on comments re GeneticReference.sequenceIdentifier (row 28)
Current Definition
DEFINITION: A unique identifier, within a specified database, representing an assembly of nucleotides used to identify a genetic variation.
EXAMPLE(S): NP_751919 is an identifier in GENBANK
OTHER NAME(S):
NOTE(S): The genetic variation may be documented in a public database or in the protocol document.
Ballot Comment
need to provide the version number. Without the version, the reference is ambiguous and non-computable. Also examples should just list the data not an explanation.
Current Disposition
Pending Input From Submitter
Proposed Disposition Comment
Agree that version number should be included, and example revised to "'NP_751919<+version>' where sequenceDatabase = 'GENBANK'", however over the years the BRIDG team has found it is often helpful to have a little explanation or contextual information in the example, not just a single value by itself. Need version number to update model.
Outstanding Questions
- What is the version number that completes the GENBANK identifier "NP_751919"?
- Should the version number be in a separate attribute or is it considered part of the identifier via some syntax?
- If it's not part of the identifier then it's not necessarily unique so should we change the data type from II to something else (CD perhaps)?
Responses
DISCUSSION 20160225: LSDAM didn’t bring in that level of detail and given that BRIDG is looking to do modeling by reference in the future, we are deferring this level of change except to amend the note as follows: NOTE(S): The genetic variation may be documented and versioned in a public database or in the protocol document.
UPDATE DONE IN THE MODEL
Return to BRIDG
