Difference between revisions of "Hackathon 2013/BestPractices"
From TaxonWorks Wiki
(One intermediate revision by one user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | What we did: | ||
+ | Assessed other taxonomic workbenches, past and present, to try to ID reasons for success/sunsetting, and then glean best practices/things to look out for as a result. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Overall the systems that have been developed seem to fall victim to funding fall-through and shifting of focus and leadership. The systems that have survived seem to be: | ||
+ | * open source and free | ||
+ | * developed by or in coordination with practicing taxonomists | ||
+ | * have steady funding or support (i.e. independent of other grants or projects) | ||
+ | * are modular and support later changes in design and alteration (Diversity Workbench and Scratchpads in particular) | ||
+ | * are designed to support collaboration between multiple people (this isn't necessarily something that is required for success, though -- however it's interesting that they seem to be designed for use cases that require collaboration at a distance) | ||
+ | * seem to be cloud-based, though am unclear on that for a few of them | ||
+ | * note: couldn’t look at ITIS taxonomic workbench because of gov’t shut down. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Basic best practices and system needs from conversation with Lisa: | ||
+ | * must provide offline access to data (so entirely cloud based is not great) | ||
+ | * support rapid data entry (either through import or clear and easy support of transcription) | ||
+ | * should be able to search from other repositories (GenBank) | ||
+ | * available on one machine (again, cloud based is not great) | ||
+ | * must support publication workflow (thus, good reference management modules are important) | ||
+ | * need to be able to hook into institutional specimen databases (depending on workflow. This means that a workbench either needs to be a solution for tricky institutional database setups (e.g. idiosyncratic DBS or convoluted KE Emu set ups), or something that can work alongside them) | ||
+ | * for systematists, should fit into existing/common bioinformatics pipelines | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
Here is our working google doc: [https://docs.google.com/document/d/14cJvWjdneQMIcO3RfS_EEDpethQXZcmY5VII1GruFwY/edit?usp=sharing] | Here is our working google doc: [https://docs.google.com/document/d/14cJvWjdneQMIcO3RfS_EEDpethQXZcmY5VII1GruFwY/edit?usp=sharing] | ||
+ | And the spreadsheetized version: [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Agy0Ax3YY340dG9PejNPTkZ2Q2RrcjU1WVZMYWxYT2c&usp=drive_web#gid=0] | ||
== Members == | == Members == |
Latest revision as of 11:01, 4 October 2013
What we did: Assessed other taxonomic workbenches, past and present, to try to ID reasons for success/sunsetting, and then glean best practices/things to look out for as a result.
Overall the systems that have been developed seem to fall victim to funding fall-through and shifting of focus and leadership. The systems that have survived seem to be:
- open source and free
- developed by or in coordination with practicing taxonomists
- have steady funding or support (i.e. independent of other grants or projects)
- are modular and support later changes in design and alteration (Diversity Workbench and Scratchpads in particular)
- are designed to support collaboration between multiple people (this isn't necessarily something that is required for success, though -- however it's interesting that they seem to be designed for use cases that require collaboration at a distance)
- seem to be cloud-based, though am unclear on that for a few of them
- note: couldn’t look at ITIS taxonomic workbench because of gov’t shut down.
Basic best practices and system needs from conversation with Lisa:
- must provide offline access to data (so entirely cloud based is not great)
- support rapid data entry (either through import or clear and easy support of transcription)
- should be able to search from other repositories (GenBank)
- available on one machine (again, cloud based is not great)
- must support publication workflow (thus, good reference management modules are important)
- need to be able to hook into institutional specimen databases (depending on workflow. This means that a workbench either needs to be a solution for tricky institutional database setups (e.g. idiosyncratic DBS or convoluted KE Emu set ups), or something that can work alongside them)
- for systematists, should fit into existing/common bioinformatics pipelines
Here is our working google doc: [1]
And the spreadsheetized version: [2]
Members
- Andrea Thomer
- Daisie Huang
- David Eades
- Julie Allen