> Instead of looking at just which engines are compatible with TPP or can > directly output pepXML, I prefer that it supports any engine whose output is > or can be converted to pepXML (and not necessarily with just the > Analysis2XML converters).
Makes sense to me. I'll forward to this to the developers for discussion. -Natalie On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Matthew Chambers <[email protected]> wrote: > At least add: > ProteinPilot > ProteinLynx > Spectrum Mill > greylag > Phenyx > Proteios > > Instead of looking at just which engines are compatible with TPP or can > directly output pepXML, I prefer that it supports any engine whose output is > or can be converted to pepXML (and not necessarily with just the > Analysis2XML converters). A little bird told me about a ProteinPilot > group2pepXML converter that can't be redistributed by its creators and ABI > refuses to do so even though they've had the code for about a year. I know > that Spectrum Mill and Phenyx have pepXML output as well. > > Our group doesn't much care about validation errors due to an incomplete > schema enumeration, but having it in there would be nice. > > -Matt > > > On 6/24/2010 1:19 PM, Natalie Tasman wrote: >> >> Hi Nathan, >> >> The search engines in pepXML are those which have been specifically >> tested with the TPP. Regarding Matt's suggestion: as far as I >> understand, the PSI groups are moving towards a new analysis standard: >> http://psidev.info/index.php?q=node/319. >> >> I haven't worked with that standard or followed those discussions >> closely, but it might make sense to put effort into this new direction >> rather than trying to extend pepXML towards a universal format. >> >> >> On the other hand, if there are search engines which are compatible >> with the TPP (at least, output pepXML) and are not yet in the schema, >> we should definitely include those. >> >> -Natalie >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Matthew Chambers >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Everything in this list would be good. Some of it isn't shotgun-capable, >>> but >>> that doesn't seem very damaging: >>> >>> http://www.ebi.ac.uk/ontology-lookup/browse.do?ontName=MS&termId=MS:1001456 >>> >>> -Matt >>> >>> >>> On 6/24/2010 11:53 AM, Jesse J wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Out of curiosity, what search engines did you have in mind? >>>> >>>> On Jun 24, 9:41 am, Nathan Edwards<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> The wiki says to send this request to the spctools-dev mailing list, >>>>> but I can't find out where this list is, or how to send to it. >>>>> >>>>> I'd like to request the addition of a (few) search engine names to the >>>>> pepXML search_summary entity, search_engine attribute enumeration. >>>>> >>>>> How do I go about this? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> - n > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "spctools-discuss" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/spctools-discuss?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "spctools-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/spctools-discuss?hl=en.
