We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Proposed feature:
Add a new IPR level displayName property in returnProperties for GET /evidencelevels
Context:
Most EvidenceLevel vertices are now linked by CrossReferenceOf edges to their IPR conterpart as per https://www.bcgsc.ca/jira/browse/KBDEV-982.
This now poses the issue of querying for these linked EvidenceLevel, as raised in https://www.bcgsc.ca/jira/browse/GERO-289.
Since the actual API implementation does not allows the retreiving of vertices linked by edges from other vertices, proposition has been made to do the heavy-lifting on the ipr_python side (https://github.com/bcgsc/pori_ipr_python/tree/feature/GERO-289-get-evidencelevel-mapping) as a 'better that nothing' solution for now.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This issue is actually oversome by IPR Python since bcgsc/pori_ipr_python#92. Could still be a nice feature to add to the GraphKB API though.
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
Proposed feature:
Add a new IPR level displayName property in returnProperties for GET /evidencelevels
Context:
Most EvidenceLevel vertices are now linked by CrossReferenceOf edges to their IPR conterpart as per https://www.bcgsc.ca/jira/browse/KBDEV-982.
This now poses the issue of querying for these linked EvidenceLevel, as raised in https://www.bcgsc.ca/jira/browse/GERO-289.
Since the actual API implementation does not allows the retreiving of vertices linked by edges from other vertices, proposition has been made to do the heavy-lifting on the ipr_python side (https://github.com/bcgsc/pori_ipr_python/tree/feature/GERO-289-get-evidencelevel-mapping) as a 'better that nothing' solution for now.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: