Meeting Minutes 20080919 Lysters8 - Revision history

Lysterp at 18:25, 19 September 2008

2008-09-19T18:25:06Z

Lysterp at 18:08, 19 September 2008

2008-09-19T18:08:32Z

Lysterp at 18:05, 19 September 2008

2008-09-19T18:05:38Z

Lysterp at 18:03, 19 September 2008

2008-09-19T18:03:35Z

Ivo at 23:47, 15 September 2008

2008-09-15T23:47:33Z

Ivo: /* 3. Consumer tools */

2008-09-15T23:46:46Z

3. Consumer tools

Ivo at 23:44, 15 September 2008

2008-09-15T23:44:53Z

Ivo at 23:42, 15 September 2008

2008-09-15T23:42:24Z

Ivo: /* Peter Lysters Top 8 Action Items (August 2008) */

2008-09-15T23:41:59Z

Peter Lysters Top 8 Action Items (August 2008)

Ivo: /* Peter Lysters Top 8 Action Items (August 2008) */

2008-09-15T23:41:50Z

Peter Lysters Top 8 Action Items (August 2008)

@@ Line 35: / Line 35: @@
 ===6. Should the Biositemaps white paper be updated? It still refers to an xml format===
-* We need to make a collective decision if we tightly couple Biositemaps and BRO2.1 (and subsequent versions) Do these become one-and-the-same? I recommend we keep these concepts separate, synergistic and interoperable -- according with the general philosophy that compartmentalized resources, where each component can easily and efficiently be swapped with another (functionally equivalent) component, typically have broader appeal, longer shelf-life and function better.
+* We need to make a collective decision if we tightly couple Biositemaps and BRO2.1 (and subsequent versions). Do these become one-and-the-same? I recommend we keep these concepts separate, synergistic and interoperable -- according with the general philosophy that compartmentalized resources, where each component can easily and efficiently be swapped with another (functionally equivalent) component, typically have broader appeal, longer shelf-life and function better.
 * Biositemaps make more sense as a concept and an infrastructure, rather than one specific implementation. If BRO and Biositemaps are "conceptually merged" and the "tiger team" decides to revise the (old) Biositemaps white-paper, the (new) manuscript title should be specific and include "RDF-based Biositemaps using Biomedical Resourceome Ontology". Again, I personally favor the distributed & decentralized approach to the (general) Biositemaps framework. If this is the approach the team decides to take, we may need two white-papers that emphasize "interoperability" rather than "standardization"!

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 === 1. Debrief meeting by [[SDIWG:Meeting_Minutes_20080919 | tiger team]]===
-=== 2. What remains to be done with the Biositemaps/BRO definition prior to its 1.0 release?===
+=== 2. What remains to be done with the Biositemaps and BRO2.1 definition prior to their release?===
-===3. Consumer/Production Tools===
+===3. Consumer/Authoring Tools for Biositemaps and BRO===
 This is what is needed is a light-weight, agile, robust and functional library to make the new RDF-based Biositemaps usable by other external resources (including, but not limited to [http://iTools.ccb.ucla.edu iTools]):
 * Consumption/Interpretation of biositemaps corpus
@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 ===4. We should get members from each of the centers on the [[SDIWG:Meeting_Minutes_20080919 | tiger team]]===
-===5. What remains to be done with the Biositemaps website and/or dissemination prior to its 1.0 release?===
+===5. What remains to be done with the Biositemaps website and/or dissemination prior to release?===
 ===6. Should the Biositemaps white paper be updated? It still refers to an xml format===
-* We need to make a collective decision if we tightly couple Biositemaps and BRO?!? Do these become one-and-the-same? I recommend we keep these concepts separate, synergistic and interoperable -- according with the general philosophy that compartmentalized resources, where each component can easily and efficiently be swapped with another (functionally equivalent) component, typically have broader appeal, longer shelf-life and function better.
+* We need to make a collective decision if we tightly couple Biositemaps and BRO2.1 (and subsequent versions) Do these become one-and-the-same? I recommend we keep these concepts separate, synergistic and interoperable -- according with the general philosophy that compartmentalized resources, where each component can easily and efficiently be swapped with another (functionally equivalent) component, typically have broader appeal, longer shelf-life and function better.
 * Biositemaps make more sense as a concept and an infrastructure, rather than one specific implementation. If BRO and Biositemaps are "conceptually merged" and the "tiger team" decides to revise the (old) Biositemaps white-paper, the (new) manuscript title should be specific and include "RDF-based Biositemaps using Biomedical Resourceome Ontology". Again, I personally favor the distributed & decentralized approach to the (general) Biositemaps framework. If this is the approach the team decides to take, we may need two white-papers that emphasize "interoperability" rather than "standardization"!
@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 * This depends on the answer of the Biositemaps/RDF-BRO synergies questions above. I would not widely announce anything that is not 98% functional. We are certainly close, though.
-===8. Next Steps beyond 1.0?===
+===8. Next Steps beyond 2.1?===
 <hr>
 [[SDIWG:Meeting_Minutes_20080919 | Back to the 2008/09/19 Meeting Page]]

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 ===3. Consumer/Production Tools===
 This is what is needed is a light-weight, agile, robust and functional library to make the new RDF-based Biositemaps usable by other external resources (including, but not limited to [http://iTools.ccb.ucla.edu iTools]):
-* Consumption/Interpretation
+* Consumption/Interpretation of biositemaps corpus
 **  General User
-*** Viewers (Browser, graphical, customized)
+*** Viewers (Browser, graphical, customized) (e.g., iTools)
 **** Individual resource Explorers
 **** Compendium of Resources
 *** Mining, comparison, discovery of CompBio Resources
-** Expert User
+** Expert User (e.g., iTools)
 *** Reader/Parsers
 *** API
-* Production/Generation
+* Authoring/Generation of biositemaps and BRO
 ** General User
 *** Entry/Update Forms (Browser, graphical, customized)

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 **** Individual resource Explorers
 **** Compendium of Resources
-**** Mining, comparison, discovery of CompBio Resources
+*** Mining, comparison, discovery of CompBio Resources
-*** Expert User
+** Expert User
-**** Reader/Parsers
+*** Reader/Parsers
-**** API
+*** API
-** Production/Generation
+* Production/Generation
-*** General User
+** General User
-**** Entry/Update Forms (Browser, graphical, customized)
+*** Entry/Update Forms (Browser, graphical, customized)
-**** Individual resource Explorers
+*** Individual resource Explorers
-*** Expert User
+** Expert User
-**** Writer/Parsers/Crawlers/Finders
+*** Writer/Parsers/Crawlers/Finders
-**** API
+*** API
-**** Resourceome Integration/Interoperability
+*** Resourceome Integration/Interoperability
 * Timeline for BioPortal to allow browsing/searching Biositemap tools tagged/identified with BRO entries

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:47, 15 September 2008
Line 43:		Line 43:

	===8. Next Steps beyond 1.0?===		===8. Next Steps beyond 1.0?===
		+
		+	<hr>
		+	[[SDIWG:Meeting_Minutes_20080919 \| Back to the 2008/09/19 Meeting Page]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:42, 15 September 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	[[Meeting_Minutes_20080919 \| Back to the 2008/09/19 Meeting Page]]	+	[[SDIWG:Meeting_Minutes_20080919 \| Back to the 2008/09/19 Meeting Page]]

	==Peter Lysters Top 8 Action Items (August 2008)==		==Peter Lysters Top 8 Action Items (August 2008)==

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 ==Peter Lysters Top 8 Action Items (August 2008)==
-The following 8 action items are derivatives of the [http://meetings.nigms.nih.gov/index.cfm?event=home&ID=4095 | NCBC AHM] and are required before a formal release of Biositemaps/BRO 1.0.
+The following 8 action items are derivatives of the [http://meetings.nigms.nih.gov/index.cfm?event=home&ID=4095 NCBC AHM] and are required before a formal release of Biositemaps/BRO 1.0.
 === 1. Debrief meeting by 'tiger team'===