Add support for using phylorefs as specifiers#73
Draft
Conversation
I don't think it's worth creating a new term for this.
This is so that phylorefs with no successes or failures are treated as test successes.
gaurav
force-pushed
the
add-apomorphy-phyloref
branch
2 times, most recently
from
4b63d30 to
f102381
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR adds an example of a phyloreference used as a specifier in another phyloreference. I had to modify the code somewhat to make it work. There is one caveat: given how the logical expression generation system works right now, using relative URIs may be tricky. Unless I can figure out a way to fix that, I'll write in the manuscript that the phyloreference being referenced must be referred to by an absolute URI only.
WIP My example uses a phyloref as the external specifier, but for completeness' sake, it would be nice to include an example of the phyloref as an internal specifier as well. Also, the syntax I've defined for this purpose could also be used to refer to a taxonomic unit by URI (i.e. as an opaque identifier) as a specifier, so it might be a good idea to test this as well.
Should be merged after #72.