Re: SBML L2v2 specification vote #4: References to controlled vocabularies
22 Dec '05 10:23
On Thursday 22 December 2005 12:22, Howard Salis wrote:
> 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.
Not exactly the spirit that all the other SBML participants usually have...
SBML has been successful exactly because tool makers have been committed to
using a common file format that all could understand. This has made several
of us to end up programming things into our software that was not
originally in our plans - but we gained compatibility and our users gained
even more. If everyone would take the intransigent position you seem to be
taking then there would be no SBML. O well.
--
Pedro Mendes
Research Associate Professor
Virginia Bioinformatics Institute,
Virginia Tech, Washington St.,
Blacksburg, VA 24061-0477, USA http://mendes.vbi.vt.edu fax:+1-540-231-2606
| 
22 Dec '05 10:23
