docs: Add some guidelines for term editors.

[gouttegd]

This PR adds a new document to provide general guidelines for editors on how to name and define (textually and formally) terms in the ontology.

Those guidelines are mostly based on available similar guidelines in FBbt.

[gouttegd]

@bvarner-ebi Thank you for your extensive review. However, I would prefer if for now the reviews were focused on the contents of the guidelines.

I appreciate your commitment to the rules of typography, but fixing missing commas after .e.g. can wait until everybody agree on what the guidelines should be. :)

[ghost]

Thank you for preparing this, @gouttegd.
Kindly see inline suggestions.

[gouttegd]

Thank you. I’ll wait until other reviewers weigh in on the contents of the guidelines (especially regarding the use of exact synonyms, since we disagree on that) before fixing the typos and other minor stuff.

[aleixpuigb]

I agree with all the content. It is written very clear and unambiguous, so it will be very useful and easy to follow for new editors.

[gouttegd]

@bvarner-ebi : Since you “requested changes” in your initial review, you need to explicitly approve the PR (to signify that you agree with how your comments had been addressed) before the PR can be merged.

@zoependlington : @dosumis was keen on having your opinion on those guidelines, so could you please have a look before we decide to merge?

[zoependlington]

This all reads well to me. The only thing I could think is perhaps a note about roman numerals vs using numbers if it applies at all to cell terms (e.g. in disease ontologies type 2 diabetes mellitus vs type II diabetes mellitus), but not essential!

[dosumis]

@gouttegd - I think we're ready to merge. While I'm with you on the synonym issue, I am consistently outvoted on it for CL, so happy to stick with this policy.

Do you see this as integrated doc for FBbt and CL in future? If so, how should we co-ordinate? Would you like to add a comment to indicate that FBbt differs, linking to the FBBt doc?

[gouttegd]

@dosumis

I think we're ready to merge

Looks like it indeed. I’ll merge now.

Do you see this as integrated doc for FBbt and CL in future?

I am not sure yet. On one hand it would be nice to have a single source of truth for the guidelines, rather than a duplicated document, but on the other hand I’d like to avoid having the FBbt documentation rely on an external (from FBbt’s point of view) source, especially since the CL policy could be modified at any time by CL editors in a direction that FBbt does not necessarily want to follow (as is already the case for the synonym usage policy).

I think that for now at least, FBbt will keep its own document separately, and I’ll try to make sure the FBbt and CL docs stay “in sync”.