Dear Scott,

In case you had not managed to convert your results with tppXMLparser,
you may have a try with RpepXML [*]. It is beta software and very much
centred around Mascot pepXML result files, so I am not sure how it
will behave with your data. If needed, I would be happy to debug and
update the package to make it more generic.

Hope this helps.

Best wishes,

Laurent

[*] http://rpepxml.r-forge.r-project.org/

-- 
Laurent Gatto
slashhome.be

On 11 September 2010 16:35, walmsls <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Thanks Natalie and Brian for your input.
> I do have CPAS for a long time,  not quite sure why i never thought of
> importing data into the pipeline!
>
> Funny thing, I ran across this other program a while back and left it
> on my pc and forgot about it.
> Here's a weblink to a program called tppxmlparser.jar written by Dr.
> Damian Fermin at U. Michigan:
>
> damianfermin.com/software.html     >>scroll down to  tppxmlparser.jar
>
> The program outputs common, but not all tags in the pepxml (and
> protxml) files.
> It includes a sql connector to populate tables.
>
> I wrote Damian for instruction on how to alter source to get specific
> output I may be interested in from the pepxml and it seems easy
> enough.
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> On Sep 10, 3:57 pm, Brian <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Another option might be to use CPAS, which is part of the LabKey
>> server 
>> (seehttps://www.labkey.org/wiki/home/Documentation/page.view?name=ms2).
>>
>> You could import your pepXML files into CPAS and then use the RLabkey
>> (http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/Rlabkey/index.html) R package
>> to connect to CPAS and slurp the data into an R data frame.  You can
>> query either a single file or many files and perform comparisons.
>> More information on the using the RLabkey package with CPAS is
>> available 
>> athttps://www.labkey.org/wiki/home/Documentation/page.view?name=rAPI
>>
>> This solution will probably be overkill if you only need to do this
>> for a handful of files, but if you have hundreds it might be worth
>> taking a look at.
>>
>> -Brian
>>
>> On Sep 9, 10:09 am, Natalie Tasman <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I wrote the pepXML viewer several years back.  If you're comfortable
>> > doing it, you could certainly write your own parsing code using XSLT
>> > (blech) or use an xml parsing library in python, perl, etc.  However,
>> > I found that there was enough domain-specifc information and some
>> > logic required to know how to interpret "what is important" in the XML
>> > file-- the schema doesn't fully specify all cases, and for example, a
>> > type of analysis may imply that certain other fields should appear.
>> > So I recommend using the viewer if possible, which takes these cases
>> > into account.
>>
>> > There are possibilities for faking a CGI environment so that you could
>> > run the viewer from the command-line; however, running it that way
>> > would basically take the same amount of time and memory.
>>
>> > Your solution will probably depend on if you need to do this for a
>> > handful of files or hundreds.  Please post back with any ideas or
>> > questions that I might be able to help you with.
>>
>> > -Natalie
>>
>> > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:17 PM, walmsls <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > Hi all:
>> > > Just wondering if there is a way to parse the pepxml (interact) file
>> > > that allows bypassing viewing the data in a web browser when exporting
>> > > to an xls (or tab delimited txt?) file?   So far, viewing results in
>> > > explorer 64 bit is way quicker than opening the data set through a 32
>> > > bit viewer, but is still a long wait (>2.5 gb memory dedicated to
>> > > opening the file in explorer).  The intention is to analyze the
>> > > dataset with R code, with all of the data being vital to the analysis.
>>
>> > > Thank you in advance!
>>
>> > > --
>> > > 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 
>> > > athttp://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.
>
>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to