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

robot template: Drop non-robot cols? #1216

Closed
joeflack4 opened this issue Aug 28, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1225
Closed

robot template: Drop non-robot cols? #1216

joeflack4 opened this issue Aug 28, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1225

Comments

@joeflack4
Copy link

joeflack4 commented Aug 28, 2024

Overview

Docs:

>A (axiom annotations): ROBOT can also annotate logical and annotation axioms. The axiom annotation will be on the axiom created on the cell to the left of the >A* template string. The > symbol can be used in front of any valid annotation character (>A, >AT, >AL, >AI)

Sometimes I have an issue where I create ROBOT templates that are also used by curators. And sometimes the most ideal layout for curation involves a non-robot column between robot cols, which sometimes causes a kind of syntax issue, resulting in a column of axioms annotations are getting ignored.

Example case

exact_synonym source_id source_label synonym_type
A oboInOwl:hasExactSynonym >A oboInOwl:hasDbXref >AI oboInOwl:hasSynonymType

Here, someone might want to see source ID and source label side-by-side, but this creates a “break” between the axiom annotation columns. So when the template is run, the synonym_type column doesn’t end up doing anything

Suggestion

I’m wondering if this is intentional design, and if there's some reason for this that I'm not aware of.

But if not, then I would suggest that "non robot" columns (columns without a robot subheader) should simply be dropped during preprocessing.

@jamesaoverton
Copy link
Member

Sorry that I didn't reply to this promptly. It's a good request, and I was able to implement it easily in #1225.

@joeflack4
Copy link
Author

Thanks @jamesaoverton ! This is a very nice quality of life improvement ;3
CC @matentzn @twhetzel FYI

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants