After-party

[Andrea Splendiani]

Hi there,

Do you think we should organize a report on the Manchester workshop ?
I've seen there is an item in the agenda. But that will be a too
short time.
I think we should try to summarize what happened AND discuss how to
present prosals back to the main biopax trunk at this point.
But we should oganize a little, otherwise it's easy to create
confusion and misundersteanding.

ciao,
Andrea

[Alan Ruttenberg]

Agreed. I will need a little time to catch up on some other things
but I am already thinking about this. Your own thoughts would be
appreciated...

-Alan

[Andrea Splendiani]

Il giorno 10/apr/06, alle ore 16:45, Alan Ruttenberg ha scritto:

> Agreed. I will need a little time to catch up on some other things
> but I am already thinking about this. Your own thoughts would be
> appreciated...

Yes. I would address the relation between the "exchange language" and
the "pathway ontology" issues. I think you and Jeremy have a very
good point on ontology modeling backed by a use case with full
implementation.
But we should organize it a little. Maybe we shouls tart a Wiki Page
on the biopax site ?

A.

[Joanne Luciano]

All,

I would like us to prepare a written report (paper) of
the workshop and the proposed representation options.

We are not prepared to report on it except to present what
we covered which I'd ask Alan to summarize, if he was agreeable.

Joanne

[Robert Stevens]

There is probably a paper in what was covered the other week. We did
a paper on OWL limitations, but this was sort of "bottom up", whereas
the BioPAX discussion was sort of top down. Looking at themes within
the problems discussed would help getting some sort of framework for
a problem space....

A report on the week's activities would bootstrap this process.

robert.