{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/The-Sequence-Ontology/SO-Ontologies/issues/84","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/The-Sequence-Ontology/SO-Ontologies/issues/84/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/The-Sequence-Ontology/SO-Ontologies/issues/84/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/The-Sequence-Ontology/SO-Ontologies/issues/84/events","html_url":"https://github.com/The-Sequence-Ontology/SO-Ontologies/issues/84","id":89152566,"number":84,"title":"base [sf#84]","user":{"login":"srynobio","id":1106139,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1106139?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio","html_url":"https://github.com/srynobio","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":4,"created_at":"2015-06-17T23:30:57Z","updated_at":"2015-06-18T00:27:24Z","closed_at":"2015-06-18T00:27:13Z","body":"**Reported by batchelorc on 2008-02-08 12:24 UTC**\nHello,\r\n\r\nWe don't currently have \"base\" in SO.  Since we have zero-length features, junctions, it seems odd not to have bases in general \\(though we do have post-transcriptionally modified RNA bases\\).\r\n\r\nFirstly, is there a case against including \"base\"?\r\n\r\nSecondly, where would it go?  Should modified\\_RNA\\_base\\_feature become a child of processed\\_transcript\\_region?  I think it would be better for base to be a child of region, then its child, modified\\_RNA\\_base\\_feature would have a new 'quality', processed \\(to be distinguished from the existing one, SO:0000900, which applies to processed pseudogenes\\) so that the reasoner can work out what to do with it.\r\n\r\nThirdly, T/U?\r\n\r\nBest wishes,\r\nColin."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/The-Sequence-Ontology/SO-Ontologies/issues/comments/112987140","html_url":"https://github.com/The-Sequence-Ontology/SO-Ontologies/issues/84#issuecomment-112987140","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/The-Sequence-Ontology/SO-Ontologies/issues/84","id":112987140,"user":{"login":"srynobio","id":1106139,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1106139?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio","html_url":"https://github.com/srynobio","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/srynobio/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-06-18T00:27:24Z","updated_at":"2015-06-18T00:27:24Z","body":"**Commented by batchelorc on 2008-02-26 15:24 UTC**\nLogged In: YES \nuser\\_id=1473024\nOriginator: YES\n\nIt makes sense for base to be a sibling of region and junction, yes.\r\n\r\nWould amino\\_acid be a child of polypeptide\\_region \\(SO:0000839\\)?  And how would it square with codon \\(SO:0000360\\)?\r\n\r\nColin."}}