You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We could keep the cell types in CL, but IMO it's cleaner if CL is pan-metazoan, and FAO becomes analogous to PO, which gross anat and cell types in one integrated ontology for a clade.
If FAO developers agree I can make a PR
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Reciprocal: obophenotype/cell-ontology#447
We could keep the cell types in CL, but IMO it's cleaner if CL is pan-metazoan, and FAO becomes analogous to PO, which gross anat and cell types in one integrated ontology for a clade.
If FAO developers agree I can make a PR
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: