Matthew> OK - so GO is potentialy a DAG, not a tree (for any given
Matthew> relation). Can you represent part-whole hierachies
Matthew> (i.e. partative with cycles)?
No. Its a acyclic (hence DAG!).
But the graphs it validates can be cyclic, surely.
__
> "Matthew" == Matthew Pocock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Matthew> OK - so GO is potentialy a DAG, not a tree (for any given
Matthew> relation). Can you represent part-whole hierachies Matthew>
>> (i.e. partative with cycles)? No. Its a acyclic (hence Matthew>
>> DAG!).
Matthew> Bu
-- Forwarded by Patrick McConnell/CanCtr/mc/Duke on
12/04/2002 02:48 PM ---
Patrick McConnell
12/04/2002 02:45 PM
To:Biojava-L
cc:"Russell Smithies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject:Re: DBSR (Document link: Patrick McConnell)
We have not pro