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

ProForma notation file format #11

Open
veitveit opened this issue May 26, 2017 · 4 comments
Open

ProForma notation file format #11

veitveit opened this issue May 26, 2017 · 4 comments

Comments

@veitveit
Copy link
Contributor

Files containing sequences that are annotated according to the nomenclature:

Suggestions:
Extension: .ptm.fasta or just .proteoforms
Format name: Proteoform format, PTM format

@trishorts
Copy link

.pf .pfm .pForm

@sgibb
Copy link
Contributor

sgibb commented Jul 31, 2017

PTM often stands for post translational modification so it is maybe misleading.

.ptm.fasta would be ok, .proteoforms is very long.

What about .ptf or .ptf.fasta?

@stefanks
Copy link
Contributor

Yes, it would be great to have a file format for storing proteoforms: it could be used downstream for proteoform database searches, etc.

Each fasta entry has a header and a sequence. I believe that the only requirement for a header is that it start with a > character.

I propose the following rules for our files:

  1. Header starting with > character
  2. Every header is unique in a file, so it could act as a key
  3. Sequence in our format

A complete specification doesn't need much more than this!

I like .pf .ptf .pfm

@acesnik acesnik changed the title Nomenclature file format ProForma notation file format Apr 3, 2018
@rfellers
Copy link
Member

rfellers commented Apr 6, 2018

I like the shorter file extensions without .fasta, but don't have a favorite. Should we allow line breaks in the middle of a ProForma string like a typical FASTA file does?

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

No branches or pull requests

6 participants