Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 36 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upMissing CONFIDENCE value #69
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This is what we have in CONFIDENCE:
Should we have a controlled vocabulary? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I've just pinged the contributor of those records by email, I can't find his GitHub handle. They originate from Justin in Canada. Re controlled vocabulary, yes, some of those are certainly NOT confidence statements but rather statements of origins. We have a standard set of options in RMassBank, which could be a start for a controlled vocabulary. Eventually we should discuss a proper ontology with @sneumann to make various confidence statements compatible with the most commonly-used confidence level schemes (scheme, year, level ...). |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
... and I could see we could unify some of those where just spacing and capitals are different ... so that we have fewer varieties of the same comment? |
Treutler commentedMay 17, 2019
There are 10 records having the tag
COMMENT: CONFIDENCE
without any confidence value. I think this should not be valid, so please create a rule for the validator and correct the confidence values.
This applies to:
AAFC/AC000433
AAFC/AC000427
AAFC/AC000428
AAFC/AC000432
AAFC/AC000429
AAFC/AC000425
AAFC/AC000431
AAFC/AC000430
AAFC/AC000434
AAFC/AC000426