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
What is the reason for the choice of string formatting for contigs to be
The display format for a Contig is chr:start-end(+/-/.). The boundaries are given as a half-open 0-based interval, like the Rust Range and BED format.
I would thing that the convention is that if the coordinate is written as 'chr:start-end' then it is 1-based-end-inclusive, while 'chr start end' would be 0-based-end-exclusive. AT least this is the convention that is followed by UCSC and plethora of utilities.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
What is the reason for the choice of string formatting for contigs to be
I would thing that the convention is that if the coordinate is written as 'chr:start-end' then it is 1-based-end-inclusive, while 'chr start end' would be 0-based-end-exclusive. AT least this is the convention that is followed by UCSC and plethora of utilities.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: