Forums

Stefan,
If you only read the sboTerms of the kineticLaw, species, and
kinetic parameters you get all the information about the rate law you
need. Of course, if you don't parse the MathML expression then you can't
compare it to the sboTerms. Whether the sboTerms 'augment' it or are a
complementary alternative is a moot point. Both should exist to give
developers the opportunity to use _either one_. And if the standard
says the MathML is authoritative...sure, why not. But my program won't
read in the SBML model without the sboTerms because it's impractical
otherwise. O well.

-Howard

>Hello Howard,
>
>On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:44:08 -0600
>Howard Salis <salis@cems.umn.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
>>This is true. So when an SBML writer changes a reaction in the model
>>to another sboTerm, it will also require changing the sboTerms of
>>each kinetic parameter and species of that reaction. This is pretty
>>straightforward from a programming point of view.
>>
>>Imho, working with sboTerms vs. MathML expressions is so much easier
>>from a programming point of view.
>>
>>
>
>This is where I think there is a big misunderstanding. You are
>wrong in assuming that the sboTerm does replace the MathML, it only
>augments it. If you just have an sboTerm you actually do not have
>anything. The MathML is always authoritative. If it is missing
>you have incorrect SBML. Having an sboTerm does not replace reading the
>MathML. You will always have to do that and check for conformity. If it
>is conform you may interpret the kinetic law according to your programs
>needs. If not you must inform the user.
>
>Thanks,
>Stefan
>
>
>
>>-Howard Salis
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>