Request from GO regarding has_participant

[tberardini]

@ukemi said:

This morning while working on the cell wall metabolism areas of GO I noticed that we have two has participant relations. One, 'has participant', is the one we have traditionally used and the other, has_participant, directly refers to a BFO term and comes in via the PO import. Of course I used the non-traditional one at first for all my edits and the obo file looked weird.

Is this problematic and should we somehow filter the one used in PO?

---

@balhoff replied:

My guess is that this is an accident of history in PO, and we could probably get them to replace the IRI with the RO one. They both have the same numeric ID.

[tberardini]

geneontology/go-ontology#16602

[cmungall]

PO PR: #688