-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
Add draft of SEP_V026 #171
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,177 @@ | ||
| # SEP V026: Introduction of “//” as a Glyph for Generic DNA Breaks in SBOL Visual | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| | SEP | | | ||
|
|
||
| | --- | --- | | ||
|
|
||
| | **Title** | Introduction of “//” as a Glyph for Generic DNA Breaks in SBOL Visual| | ||
|
|
||
| | **Authors** | Georgie Hau Sorensen (georgiehausorensen@gmail.com), Lukas Buecherl | | ||
|
|
||
| | **Editor** | Felipe Buson (fxbuson@gmail.com)| | ||
|
|
||
| | **Type** | Specification | | ||
|
|
||
| | **SBOL Visual Version** | | | ||
|
|
||
| | **Status** | Draft | | ||
|
|
||
| | **Created** | 26 Feb 2026 | | ||
|
|
||
| | **Last modified** | 26 Feb 2026 | | ||
|
|
||
| | **Issue** | | | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Abstract | ||
|
|
||
| This proposal introduces a new SBOL Visual glyph, represented by the character sequence “//”, to denote generic breaks in DNA. These breaks include regions where sequence continuity is intentionally unspecified, undefined, interrupted, or skipped for schematic clarity. The use of “//” aligns with widespread conventions in biological schematics and provides a simple, intuitive, and compact symbol to improve readability. | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Is this being proposed as an alternative glyph to omitted detail, or as a separate glyph?
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Table of Contents <remove TOC if SEP is rather short> | ||
|
|
||
| - [1. Rationale](#rationale) | ||
|
|
||
| - [2. Specification](#specification) | ||
|
|
||
| - [3. Example or Use Case](#example) | ||
|
|
||
| - [4. Backwards Compatibility](#compatibility) | ||
|
|
||
| - [5. Discussion](#discussion) | ||
|
|
||
| - [References](#references) | ||
|
|
||
| - [Copyright](#copyright) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## 1. Rationale <a name="rationale"></a> | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| 1.1. Widespread Use | ||
|
|
||
| The “//” mark is traditionally used in biological schematics to indicate: | ||
|
|
||
| - “region removed/not drawn” | ||
|
|
||
| - “break in continuity” | ||
|
|
||
| - “shift in sequence” | ||
|
|
||
| This convention is common in textbooks, research illustrations, and even circuit diagrams in other fields. | ||
|
|
||
| The familiarity of this symbol lowers the cognitive load for new users, and it makes diagrams more immediately interpretable. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| 1.2. Glyph Simplicity | ||
|
|
||
| The “//” glyph: | ||
|
|
||
| - Is visually compact | ||
|
|
||
| - Does not resemble any existing SBOL Visual glyph | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Per the discussion on SEP V003, there is a significant potential for confusion with blunt restriction site. I also see potential for confusion with pairs of stem-only DNA locations. We can still use this glyph, but we need to be explicit about the potential confusion and our SHOULD recommendations to people in order to mitigate it. |
||
|
|
||
| - Can be rendered easily in both digital and hand-drawn form | ||
|
|
||
| - Maintains clarity even at small scale | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## 2. Specification <a name="specification"></a> | ||
|
|
||
| 2.1. Glyph Definition | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. In prior SBOL Visual SEPs, we have always had a draft implementation of the glyph on a branch, in order to ensure that it is fully defined before the vote begins. What does in this section is then all the substantive elements of the diff between that branch and the main: See, for example, SEP V011 on genomic context:
Until this specification is fully defined, we can't really know enough to properly approve. |
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| The “//” glyph consists of two short, parallel, diagonal slashes. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| These may be oriented: | ||
|
|
||
| - Forward-slanted (primary, recommended) | ||
|
|
||
| - Backward-slanted (optional alternative for stylistic compatibility with other diagram elements) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| 2.2. Placement | ||
|
|
||
| The glyph placed in-line on a DNA backbone to indicate that: | ||
|
|
||
| - A region of arbitrary length is not shown | ||
|
|
||
| - Sequence continuity is intentionally omitted | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| Example: | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| [ promoter ] —— // —— [ CDS ] | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| 2.3. Semantic Meaning | ||
|
|
||
| The glyph may represent a non-specific sequence gap | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## 3. Backwards Compatibility <a name='compatibility'></a> | ||
|
|
||
| This SEP is backward compatible insofar as it doesn't directly introduces conflicts with existing glyphs. There is an argument to be made whether its function can be fully covered using the existing "engineered region" glyph. It is worth noting that any diagrams without this introduced break glyph will remain valid. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## 4. Discussion <a name='discussion'></a> | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Copyright <a name='copyright'></a> | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| <p xmlns:dct="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:vcard="http://www.w3.org/2001/vcard-rdf/3.0#"> | ||
|
|
||
| <a rel="license" | ||
|
|
||
| href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/"> | ||
|
|
||
| <img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/zero/1.0/88x31.png" style="border-style: none;" alt="CC0" /> | ||
|
|
||
| </a> | ||
|
|
||
| <br /> | ||
|
|
||
| To the extent possible under law, | ||
|
|
||
| <a rel="dct:publisher" | ||
|
|
||
| href="sbolstandard.org"> | ||
|
|
||
| <span property="dct:title">SBOL developers</span></a> | ||
|
|
||
| has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to | ||
|
|
||
| <span property="dct:title">SEP V001</span>. | ||
|
|
||
| This work is published from: | ||
|
|
||
| <span property="vcard:Country" datatype="dct:ISO3166" | ||
|
|
||
| content="US" about="sbolstandard.org"> | ||
|
|
||
| United States</span>. | ||
|
|
||
| </p> | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The table is not formatting correctly due to this extra line breaks.
There are a bunch of other places below with formatting problems too - please review visually and clean up accordingly.