Re: blog: semantic dissonance in uniprot

Phillip Lord wrote:
> Oliver Ruebenacker <curoli@gmail.com> writes:
>   
>>      Hello Philip, All,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Phillip Lord
>> <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk> wrote:
>>     
>>> My own feeling is that it's biology which wove the web; we're just
>>> caught in the middle. What role for the web and semantics? Well, I think
>>> we need a coordinated, controlled and defined way of expressing our
>>> mutual confusion. I'd love to have a clear definition of gene (or
>>> protein). In it's absence, a good way of expressing "err..." is probably
>>> the best we can do.
>>>       
>>   I don't know whether the BioPAX Level 2 definition of protein is the
>> most useful one, but at least it sounds clear to me:
>>
>>   protein = anything containing exactly one polypeptide chain
>>
>>   Clear enough?
>>     
>
>
> So insulin is not a protein, wheras a dipeptide is?
>   

indeed;  insulin is a protein complex, and a dipeptide, following this
and other similar definitions, is a protein.


> Besides which, the issue being discussed here is one of equality. When
> are two proteins the same protein? 
>   

only when 2 = 1.

vQ

Received on Thursday, 26 March 2009 13:13:49 UTC