Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!iuvax!bionet!icrf.ac.uk!S_BRYANT
From: S_BRYANT@icrf.ac.uk
Newsgroups: bionet.general
Subject: (none)
Message-ID: <8903301350.AA20470@net.bio.net>
Date: 30 Mar 89 22:18:06 GMT
Sender: daemon@NET.BIO.NET
Lines: 38

Re: GENCOM Could be Restricted (Martin Bishop).


    Unfortunately, my mailbox has been rejecting network mail recently -
hopefully fixed now - I think I may have missed some prior correspondence
to the above message. If copies of anything between my initial proposal
and Martin's comments could be forwarded to me, I would be extremely
grateful.


    Martin is of course quite right. The project so far has not attempted
to encompass more than linkage analysis and related genetic mapping domains,
it would certainly be taking on too much at this stage to try and
incorporate data on physical mapping or much from the clinical area. It has
been found that the acute need is to shift data between applications handling
this kind of information.

    Probably GENetic COMputing is an inappropriate name for a board which
will be almost exclusively restricted to human work and to a restricted
branch of genetics. Logically, it would fit under the umbrella of the kind of
board proposed by Martin, which would encompass the range of activities
pertaining to the human genome.

    LINKUP would be an ideal alternative, more explicit name, if
acceptable.

    If someone could let me know who to contact as a UK representative, I
have some documentation which explains things in more detail. It is probably
worth stating again that the are of interest is at present genetic maps, not
physical ones, and that sequence/structure information has also been
excluded. If the approach is successful, then these areas could be targetted
for similar attention.



            Steve Bryant

         Imperial Cancer Research Fund, UK.