On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Enrico Zini <[email protected]> wrote: > Alternatively, we can stick to "works-with::sequence" if we can think of > other sequences, non-biological but still somehow with similar behaviour > as far as software is concerned, that software may work with. I can't > think of anything like that, so I'd go with "biological-sequence" at the > moment, and we're always in time to rename it later.
On the risk of jumping in without proper context, would it make sense in the debtags discussion to substitute biological-sequence with a more finer granularity group: dna-sequence, protein-sequence, rna-sequence? This way, there is no risk of ambiguity with other areas, and also not all bioinformatics software deal with all kinds of sequences. This would also lead to how to also proper tag other types of protein representation, other than it's sequence (like the 3d model of secondary and tertiary structures, crystallography data, etc). regards FF -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
