OpenWetWare:Information management/Standard protocol submission

From OpenWetWare

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(What should we do with the existing protocols?)
Line 2: Line 2:
*'''[[User:Jennyn|Jennyn]] 14:25, 16 June 2006 (EDT)''': Something that I could spend my time doing is going through each of the protocols and formatting them to the new template. Otherwise, we can have a little "protocol standardizing committee" who can do this. I'm not sure if there's a faster way to do this. Please comment.
*'''[[User:Jennyn|Jennyn]] 14:25, 16 June 2006 (EDT)''': Something that I could spend my time doing is going through each of the protocols and formatting them to the new template. Otherwise, we can have a little "protocol standardizing committee" who can do this. I'm not sure if there's a faster way to do this. Please comment.
*'''[[User:Jasonk|Jasonk]] 14:56, 16 June 2006 (EDT):''' I think in general we'll have to leave any protocol posted by someone else unchanged, since they may have it in a format that they find most useful.  I'm assuming we'll need to work towards protocol aggregations like [[DNA Ligation]], but we should talk about it.
*'''[[User:Jasonk|Jasonk]] 14:56, 16 June 2006 (EDT):''' I think in general we'll have to leave any protocol posted by someone else unchanged, since they may have it in a format that they find most useful.  I'm assuming we'll need to work towards protocol aggregations like [[DNA Ligation]], but we should talk about it.
 +
**'''[[User:Kathmc|Kathleen]] 15:13, 16 June 2006 (EDT)''': I agree with this. Maybe we should focus on standardizing the main protocol pages and leave individual protocols alone. Different labs may have different formats that they like and we don't want to do anything to discourage submission of protocols. We can encourage addition of a link to the main page of each protocol, and provide a suggested format if people want to use it. If we provide a template, people may just standardize out of convenience. I think that eventually all of this will evolve and stabilize into a more standardized format, but we need to get more people actively contributing first.
==Action plan for standardizing protocols==
==Action plan for standardizing protocols==
*Should we hold a meeting for this?
*Should we hold a meeting for this?
'''[[User:Jasonk|Jasonk]] 14:57, 16 June 2006 (EDT):''' Definitely.
'''[[User:Jasonk|Jasonk]] 14:57, 16 June 2006 (EDT):''' Definitely.

Revision as of 14:13, 16 June 2006

What should we do with the existing protocols?

  • Jennyn 14:25, 16 June 2006 (EDT): Something that I could spend my time doing is going through each of the protocols and formatting them to the new template. Otherwise, we can have a little "protocol standardizing committee" who can do this. I'm not sure if there's a faster way to do this. Please comment.
  • Jasonk 14:56, 16 June 2006 (EDT): I think in general we'll have to leave any protocol posted by someone else unchanged, since they may have it in a format that they find most useful. I'm assuming we'll need to work towards protocol aggregations like DNA Ligation, but we should talk about it.
    • Kathleen 15:13, 16 June 2006 (EDT): I agree with this. Maybe we should focus on standardizing the main protocol pages and leave individual protocols alone. Different labs may have different formats that they like and we don't want to do anything to discourage submission of protocols. We can encourage addition of a link to the main page of each protocol, and provide a suggested format if people want to use it. If we provide a template, people may just standardize out of convenience. I think that eventually all of this will evolve and stabilize into a more standardized format, but we need to get more people actively contributing first.

Action plan for standardizing protocols

  • Should we hold a meeting for this?

Jasonk 14:57, 16 June 2006 (EDT): Definitely.

Personal tools