Remove all instances of 'directly regulates', 'directly positively regulates' and 'directly negatively regulates

[pgaudet]

We have decided not to use those.

Can we remove? Or will that break something ?

[vanaukenk]

Do we have a mechanism to update all the existing models that use these relations, as well as 'directly activates' and 'directly inhibits'?

If not, we will now have a lot of models that are invalid. It'd be good to be able to update things like this programmatically before we remove the relations.

[ukemi]

We also need to do at least one other mass replacement of relations. We need to change stand-alone CC annotations that are to cellular anatomical entities to located_in rather than part_of. Annotations to complexes can stay as they are.

[cmungall]

@pgaudet can you add more context - what meeting was this decided on? What was the rationale? how will models we updated

Will we use causally_upstream_of_[{negative,positive}]_effect in place?

[pgaudet]

This was decided on GO-CAM modeling calls. We decided that there was no case when we needed to distinguish

• regulates and directly regulates (and same for positive and negative regulates).
  I dont know how models can be updated, this was also the question @vanaukenk was asking Remove all instances of 'directly regulates', 'directly positively regulates' and 'directly negatively regulates #255 (comment)

Thanks, Pascale