OpenWetWare:Respond to NSF
From OpenWetWare
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
#Journal | #Journal | ||
#Organization | #Organization | ||
| + | #Other? | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==How should OWW best leverage existing software development efforts?== | ||
| + | #MediaWiki | ||
| + | #Jot/Google | ||
| + | #Apple OS Next | ||
| + | #Other | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==What should be the relationship between OWW and publishers?== | ||
| + | #None | ||
| + | #Sell-out | ||
| + | #Destroy | ||
Revision as of 17:34, 16 January 2007
Contents |
High Level Comments from NSF
- Wants to see a 3-year plan (willing to hear case for 5 years, w/ evaluation point at EOY3)
- Wants to see money spent on actual stuff (e.g., code) not project management
What user types should OWW target for focused development support? What are the needs of these communities?
- Individual researcher
- Research lab
- Research community
- Educator
- Journal
- Organization
- Other?
How should OWW best leverage existing software development efforts?
- MediaWiki
- Jot/Google
- Apple OS Next
- Other
What should be the relationship between OWW and publishers?
- None
- Sell-out
- Destroy
