Orion Buske

@kellrott As one more example, you can take a look at the Matchmaker API's representation of phenotype terms (called `Feature`s): PR #258. They're basically OntologyTerms, but have some additional metadata...

@jnguyenx Thanks for you comments! For 1. and 2., it's true, `hgvs` and `label` are not in the specification but it was intentional. We've been operating under the policy that...

Hi Jeremy, Regarding `patient`: that's a fair point. I'm happy to update the test files if someone else +1s this. Regarding `ageOfOnset`, it is an _optional_ field. The only mandatory...

Since each request includes only a single patient, there's no easy way to make the 50 patient dataset spec-compliant, per se. I could make the test data a list of...

Update: we tracked it down to a typo in the original manuscript and committed a fix. I'm going through and verifying all the other variants now.

Hi @azankl, thanks for the feedback. This is something we changed in later versions of PhenoTips, and should be pretty simple for someone to modify in this project, so have...

I think it is useful for two reasons: - testing and debugging - transparency (what information was received and used) I find the latter to be a much stronger argument....

I think we should put this off to 2.0.

Okay, I updated the proposal to completely drop the compliance aspect and any mention of required baseline algorithms. I agree those agendas are not consistent with the spirit of the...