Laron,
It's a good thought. However the web site I already setup
http://www.animalgenome.org/bioinfo/projects/ato/dev/ coupled with
the mailing list "atoteam@animalgenome.org", which has all mails
archived, viewed by threads or by subjects or by authors, was to
serve this purpose.
Besides, the SourceForge.net web sites/functions Jie just got in
action also serves similar purposes.
Wiki is a nice web sharing tool but it requires everyone to be
familiar with its editing formats. Another possible downside is it's
hard to trace back a topic track following up a versatile changing
history thread with an evolving ontology development because anyone
can change anything on a wiki site.
I am planning a trip back to Ames around July 13-18 (not decided
yet). Maybe it's a good time we can have a few issues well discussed
then? (I am starting to through things into my "to-do" list. Please
alert me your items of interests. I hope to visit with everyone.
Zhiliang
At 03:58 PM 6/13/2006, you wrote:
>Team,
>I have attached a document which explains my recommendations for
>dealing with suggestions from the research community. LH
--- Dealing with Suggestions to the Ontology LaRon Hughes In a recent email from Marcos Ramos, a student of Max Rothschild, he indicated that the he had a concern about the categorizing on traits in the pigqtldb. It is highly probable that once the ATO ontology is developed, there will be some disagreements among the community on naming and categorizing conventions. Therefore, a system will need to be set up that will allow discourse about these problems. I recommend that a wiki (a collaborative website that allows postings) be created that will be composed of experts in the respective fields (e.g. pig, cow, chicken). Each expert would be able to post an email to the wiki and as a result an email would be sent to the other experts. This would allow other experts to view suggestions and respond, thus, allowing a consensus for solving conflicts. Conflicts that are not resolved through the experts would need to be remedied by the judgment of the activity coordinator. Once each portion of the ontology is completed, I suggest that there be a two week period when experts can have access to the wiki and discuss any problems or conflicts. Once this period is complete and a working version is committed, I suggest that we continue to have this type of system to handle editing issues.Received on Tue Jun 13 21:33:26 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu May 03 2007 - 22:46:26 CDT