Hi all, I have had a look through the proposals at http://sbml.org/wiki/SBML_Level_3_Efforts . I don't know if there is a draft for the 'core' of SBML level three yet, although it seems the plan is that it will not change much from level 2.
I think that under the current approach of splitting metadata and data in CellML such that anything which alters the mathematical interpretation of the model is data, and anything else is metadata, some, but not all, of the extensions for SBML 3 would be data in CellML. Going through each extension: * Diagram Representation: This appears to be pure metadata information. * Spatial Features: This also appears to be pure metadata information. * Hierarchical Model Composition: This is similar in intent to the import functionality already present in CellML. * Multicomponent species: This seems to address a number of related problems regarding the representations of reactions which act on more than one species, where the species differ only by changes in phosphorylation state or location, or some other property like this. This is probably too domain specific for CellML to deal with in this way. * Dynamic structures: This aims to allow for the structure of models to change dynamically (e.g. to create multicellular models). The module documentation notes that "arrays and sets are alternative proposals for roughly the same kind of capability, and it is likely that only one will ultimately be chosen as a supported SBML Level 3 language extension". * Arrays / Sets: This extension aims to describe something fairly similar to the goals of the CellML proposals to add additional data types other than real numbers. * Parameter Sets: This seems to be a way to split the model mathematics away from parameter definitions. This is commonly already done in CellML using imports. * Alternative Reactions: This aims at being able to specify what type of model is being expressed. It has some similarities in intent to the simulation metadata, but it does actually alter the interpretation of the model. I think that this only makes sense in SBML because of the domain specific representation in SBML can be mapped to multiple different non-domain specific mappings. In CellML, this mapping has already been performed. However, the extension in SBML does imply the ability to represent other types of models, such as stochastic models. * Distributions: The representation of statistical distributions is something which CellML does not currently provide any explicit provision for. However, it may be something that could be fitted into CellML without any major changes, so is something worth studying. This may be complicated by the operators present as predifined symbols content MathML - we may need to define some new semantics to allow for this type of model. Best regards, Andrew _______________________________________________ cellml-discussion mailing list cellml-discussion@cellml.org http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion