Menu

#192 standard defs revisited

open
nobody
None
5
2005-11-29
2005-07-22
No

I'm finding it frustrating having the standard defs
scattered all over the ontology pages ... I know that was
done on purpose (SF 1122497), but it's hard to find specific
ones -- you have to already know how they've been
categorized to know where on the page to look. Maybe the
style guide and each ontology guide should link to a
standard def page (which could use the spiffy new search, a
la the biblio). I would prefer having the defs all in one
place!
m

Discussion

  • Jennifer Deegan

    Jennifer Deegan - 2005-07-22

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=735846

    Hi,

    I'm finding that as well actually. It's fine for the bits of documentation that I
    wrote myself, but for the other stuff there's a bit too much mind reading
    involved.

    Thinking it through I start to wonder whether the standard DAGs ought to go
    with them, but then that leaves the documentation accompanying the
    standard defs and DAGs a bit out on a limb. Might it be a possibility just to
    have one table somewhere with an index of terms carrying standard defs
    with each hyperlinked to the actual listing of that standard def? That way
    we'd be able to find the one we want but the information about any given
    topic would still be kept together.

    If that doesn't sound good I'd be happy to have the standard dags together
    and just a hyperlink from the documentation text.

    Jen

     
  • Midori Harris

    Midori Harris - 2005-07-22

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=436423

    I think the standard DAGs are a bit different, and it's
    not as much of a problem to have them where they
    are. They'll be used mainly by curators who already
    have to think carefully about terms and relationships,
    whereas with defs I just want to find the term text that
    matches, and copy-n-paste the standard bit. The DAGs
    also really only make sense in the context of the
    explanatory blurbs.

    A hyperlinked list for standard defs would be fine with me.

    m

     
  • girlwithglasses

    girlwithglasses - 2005-07-27

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=473796

    I can easily create a standard def thing on the same lines as the biblio. Another
    std def problem is that not all the standard defs used in the ontologies are
    actually on the web pages. I will see if I can find any more (there are several that
    can be added that I can think of just off the top of my head).

     
  • Midori Harris

    Midori Harris - 2005-11-29
    • summary: standard defs revisted --> standard defs revisited
     

Log in to post a comment.