psidev-qc-dev

[Psidev-qc-dev] PSI annual meeting agenda

[Mathias W. <wa...@in...>]

Dear all, 

The PSI annual meeting agenda for 'our' track looks like this right now:
	
Track 4 - Quality Control

Tue - morning:
qcML / minimal requirements
Minimal reporting requirements

Tue - afternoon:
Software support
Implementation in repositories

Wed - morning:
Break-outs based on interests
Break-outs based on interests
Summary, wrap-up

I would, however, very much like to discuss how we are going to integrate our collection of metrics into the cv (or do the CV from scratch), the cv into the schema and the minimum requirements in all of this *before* we go on about software and repository integration.
Depending on how detailed the cv terms are going to be in 'final' will influence how lax we can be on the schema side.
Because, and I will stress this ever so often, one goal should be machine readability *without* ethereal knowledge of how some certain bit of data is meant. In the end, we want to support the widespread adoption of (comparable?) quality metrics for which it might be detrimental if reported metrics are ambiguous/unintelligible without the context of the particular software. 

TL;DR: I suggest to have a CV definitions session on Tuesday afternoon and move the other points thereafter.

Please respond soon, deadline for agenda fix and print is soon (this week!), otherwise, I will go ahead with the changes. 
	
best, 
  mths

Re: [Psidev-qc-dev] PSI annual meeting agenda

[David T. <dt...@su...>]

Hi, Mathias.

I agree entirely that doing a CV / qcML markup session as early as
possible is entirely necessary.

If you are willing to take a lead on shaping the agenda, that will
certainly be helpful to me.  I am besieged with local tasks in the
run-up to this meeting, so I won't be able to spend as much time on it
as I should.

Thanks,
Dave

On 4/12/2017 1:12 PM, Mathias Walzer wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> The PSI annual meeting agenda for 'our' track looks like this right now:
>
> Track 4 - Quality Control
>
> Tue - morning:
> qcML / minimal requirements
> Minimal reporting requirements
>
> Tue - afternoon:
> Software support
> Implementation in repositories
>
> Wed - morning:
> Break-outs based on interests
> Break-outs based on interests
> Summary, wrap-up
>
> I would, however, very much like to discuss how we are going to integrate our collection of metrics into the cv (or do the CV from scratch), the cv into the schema and the minimum requirements in all of this *before* we go on about software and repository integration.
> Depending on how detailed the cv terms are going to be in 'final' will influence how lax we can be on the schema side.
> Because, and I will stress this ever so often, one goal should be machine readability *without* ethereal knowledge of how some certain bit of data is meant. In the end, we want to support the widespread adoption of (comparable?) quality metrics for which it might be detrimental if reported metrics are ambiguous/unintelligible without the context of the particular software.
>
> TL;DR: I suggest to have a CV definitions session on Tuesday afternoon and move the other points thereafter.
>
> Please respond soon, deadline for agenda fix and print is soon (this week!), otherwise, I will go ahead with the changes.
>
> best,
>    mths
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Psidev-qc-dev mailing list
> Psi...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/psidev-qc-dev


The integrity and confidentiality of this email is governed by these terms / Hierdie terme bepaal die integriteit en vertroulikheid van hierdie epos. http://www.sun.ac.za/emaildisclaimer