Does the order of prefix tags and N terminal modifications matter?

[rfellers]

I know that this is valid from the manuscript:
[Unimod]+[1]-S[21]GRGK...

Is this also valid ProForma?
[1]-[Unimod]+S[21]GRGK...

[veitveit]

I would say no. Definition of the key type should always come first.

…

On Wed, 21 Mar 2018, 22:12 Ryan Fellers, ***@***.***> wrote: I know that this is valid from the manuscript: [Unimod]+[1]-S[21]GRGK... Is this also valid ProForma? [1]-[Unimod]+S[21]GRGK... — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#28>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APEZheC9UQulaBc-Dj3uMzTP60VoIfTVks5tgsIzgaJpZM4S15BE> .

[acesnik]

Good question! I agree with @veitveit. It's valid syntax (computer readable), but for human readability, I think we should always have the key definition to be first, since it pertains to the N-terminal modification tag.

[rleduc42]

I agree with veitveit and acesnik.

[rfellers]

Excellent, sounds like everyone is in agreement. I guess that means it is adopted? Is there a living standard document that will incorporate this clarification? Either way, I can now continue with the parser development, thanks!

[acesnik]

Yes, I think we should adopt this as an addition to Rule 6, the one that talks about prefix tags. Here is the living document. Our first change after publishing the initial standard!