Skip to content
New issue

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

Search in QuickGO - field source of result #19

Open
mcourtot opened this issue Jan 26, 2016 · 5 comments
Open

Search in QuickGO - field source of result #19

mcourtot opened this issue Jan 26, 2016 · 5 comments

Comments

@mcourtot
Copy link

When searching for "protein folding chaperone", "protein binding" is correctly returned as first hit, but it remains opaque for users - would it be possible to add an indication as to why this term is returned (when not an exact match to the existing label), something like "exact match narrow synonym" in maybe italic greyed out next to the result? See example below.

screen shot 2016-01-26 at 15 33 13

@xwatkins
Copy link
Contributor

There's plans to add syntax highlighting later which should cover this scenario: a small paragraph containing the matching string would be returned with the term itself highlighted.

@mcourtot
Copy link
Author

Fantastic - @tonysawfordebi mentioned highlighting was coming (which is why I didn't complain about it here ;)) but not that there would be further additions. I'll wait to see how it is rendered then.

Note: this stems from a comment on the gene ontology tracker. Ignoring the ontology issue, the last line reads "Also the terms "protein folding chaperone" does not come up anywhere in my list of suggestions in QuickGO." Is it ok to tell Val that her suggestion has been taken into account and is already implemented in the new QuickGO?

@xwatkins
Copy link
Contributor

We are still working out the specifics so please wait before announcing it. I will check with you when we get to it to make sure we're covering all use cases.

@mcourtot
Copy link
Author

Great, thanks!

@ValWood
Copy link

ValWood commented Jan 27, 2016

Nice!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants