You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When dealing with a design, I often find that there are multiple equivalent ways to refer to a single item.
For example:
An iGEM part can be referred to with or without the BBa prefix (e.g., J23101 vs. BBa_J23101)
A small molecule can be referred to by its PubChem or CHEBI identifier (e.g., Arabinose is both pubchem.compound:439195 and CHEBI:17535)
An aliquot can be referred to by an SBOL Implementation or a LIMS system identifier.
Right now, I track these relationships with special-purpose code, mapping from aliases to a preferred canonical form. I think it would be better to have a standardized way of recording and tracking such relationships, similar to what was done with the SBOL Project Dictionary.
I don't think we have enough use cases to go straight to a standard yet, but it would be good to begin experimenting with this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
When dealing with a design, I often find that there are multiple equivalent ways to refer to a single item.
For example:
Right now, I track these relationships with special-purpose code, mapping from aliases to a preferred canonical form. I think it would be better to have a standardized way of recording and tracking such relationships, similar to what was done with the SBOL Project Dictionary.
I don't think we have enough use cases to go straight to a standard yet, but it would be good to begin experimenting with this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: