MaintBot: New page: Great question. For the purposes of this diagram, which is more of a functional listing of transporters, the best approach is to use graphical lines rather than interactions. I went ahead ...

MaintBot — Thu, 18 Aug 2016 19:27:46 GMT

New page: Great question. For the purposes of this diagram, which is more of a functional listing of transporters, the best approach is to use graphical lines rather than interactions. I went ahead ...

New page

Great question. For the purposes of this diagram, which is more of a functional listing of transporters, the best approach is to use graphical lines rather than interactions. I went ahead and converted them all just now. The use of interactions comes with strict modeling constraints that would not be helpful here.

In other cases, where you are modeling a transport event in the context of a connected pathway diagram, then we recommend using the generic arrow type for transport interactions. I used to use mim-conversion, but was told by the BioPAX experts that that is reserved for actual changes in structure/chemistry, not just location.

Great work! [[User:MaintBot|WikiPathways admin]] 19:27, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Thread:«no subject» (32) - Revision history

MaintBot: New page: Great question. For the purposes of this diagram, which is more of a functional listing of transporters, the best approach is to use graphical lines rather than interactions. I went ahead ...