DataONE:meeting notes:17 June 2010 chat
9:01 AM Heather: You've been invited to this chat room!
Hi Sarah and Nic. Nicholas: Hello Sarah: good morning Heather: Valerie will be joining in a sec I'm guessing
9:02 AM Nic, did you have a chance to see the chat log from yesterday?
Any questions out of that? Nicholas: I did Valerie has joined
9:03 AM Heather: and btw the agenda for today, very similar to what we didn't get to yesterday:
Nicholas: I think there was a question for me about the content in treebase? yes? Heather: http://www.openwetware.org/wiki/DataONE:Notebook/Summer_2010/2010/06/17 Nicholas: From what I know, is that its mostly data matrices
9:04 AM Valerie: ah
Nicholas: "It includes phylogenetic trees and data matrices, together with information about the relevant publication, taxa, morphological and sequence-based characters, and published analyses." Heather: I just had an interesting conversation in the hall of the Biodiversity Centre at UBC Sarah: yep that's what i noticed when i downloaded some data Heather: supposedly there is a thing called "super trees" which is people building big trees out of other trees Sarah: a lot of it is phylo figures from the paper itself Heather: other trees = potentially things in TreeBASE Sarah: i.e. actual intext figures plus the data matriz
9:05 AM thanks for that confirmation though
Heather: so might see reuse in that context. The prof I was talking to didn't say if it was on the order of 5 trees or 200 trees... obviously citation patterns would be different. Anyway, thought it was interesting. hmmmm, not seeing Valerie Valerie: I'm here
9:06 AM Heather: oh, hi Valerie! Sorry about that
Valerie: it's cool Heather: great. ok, so agenda is here: http://www.openwetware.org/wiki/DataONE:Notebook/Summer_2010/2010/06/17 anythign to add?
9:07 AM ok, let's start then.
want to finalize friday blog plans here, since you are all together? Nicholas: sure.. did we want to do some kind of poll ? Valerie: I like that Idea
9:08 AM Sarah: i like it (just sent an email in response before this chat)
Heather: make it easy to vote, easy to see results Valerie: I was about to send a message saying it's a great way to make sure we have something to comment on the following friday
9:09 AM Heather: yup. so want to hash out the question here or on email?
Valerie: I don't see why we couldn't do it here er, discuss here Heather: somebody going to look into what poll-hosting tech you'll use? there is a popular plug in for wordpress, probably? Nicholas: I'm on it Heather: good. begin :)
9:10 AM you're on the tech, nic? great.
Sarah: i'm fine with the question heather already proposed
9:11 AM Heather: here it is, for ref:
"As a researcher, what prevents you from citing data according to best practices?"
- I don't reuse data - I don't know what the best practices are for citing data - I do cite data according to best practices. Definitely. - I do cite data according to best practices. I think. - There are contradictory best practices. - It takes too long - I tried but my publisher wouldn't let me - Other with easy commenting on the blog post.
Valerie: it's a good initial question since Sarah's post was about this
9:12 AM Heather: nic? Or other answer possibilities?
Nicholas: no I think this is good,,, I was just browsing for poll plug ins
9:13 AM I think it gets to the point of what we are doing
Heather: ok, cool. One idea is to create an OWW page for brainstorming future poll ideas.... that way people can add as they come up with them, might get some mentor feedback, etc Sarah: yeah. i keep a personal log of the questions i have some philosophical, some about my research, some about "what if.."
9:14 AM so, that might be good to do as a group
also helps generate ideas for analysis and write up Heather: yup! maybe even link to the OWW page from the initial poll page, so that people who visit the poll who are interested can throw in ideas.... good idea, Sarah. Valerie: cool Nicholas: ditto Sarah, I need to get better at putting these into my oww space though
9:15 AM Sarah: yeah, i have some on scrap paper or email i still need to txfr, but i'm trying
Heather: Nic, any barriers to doing that other than time? ie do you have any questions about it or things we can help with?
9:16 AM Nicholas: no no, I think it's just getting into the habit of keeping a central place for my notes
and getting it into my workflow Heather: yup, definitely forming new habits. me too.
9:17 AM ok, knoxville.
everybody got that the plan is to meet in Knoxville TN on July 7 and 8th? that works for everyone? Valerie: yes Nicholas: yes Sarah: yes Heather: good! then write it on calendars and we'll figure out details soon
9:18 AM Valerie: ok, excellent
Nicholas: great Heather: for now, just wanted to say that we will aim to have explicit goals for the meeting and that will probably mean that to get the most out of it, we'll all have to do some prep I don't know what kind of prep yet :) it depends on the goals, which I also don't know yet ;)
9:19 AM Valerie: ok
Heather: but I'm guessing it might be something like draft posters or presentations, and also perhaps things beyond that, like some draft analysis or paper outlines, or something like that
9:20 AM Sarah: like a mini conference meeting?
Heather: it probably will include some detailed work, and to prep for that we'll probably want to have gotten our feet dirty with statts Yeah, Sarah, I actually have no idea yet. I'm mostly just giving you all a heads up to say that
9:21 AM you might want to mentally consider the week before the meeting to be "meeting prep" time, to a large degree
the meeting prep will (hopefully) be right in line with work you'd be doing on your projects anyway.... it just has a due date of July 7th. that make sense? Valerie: we also have a due date on the 30th, right?
9:22 AM Heather: right, for your project milestones.
In the next week or two we'll figure out what we want to get out of the knoxville meeting, and then figure out how best to present the project milestone work, the open questions, etc....
9:23 AM Nicholas: I like the idea of a mini conference- at least in terms of how we consider preparing 9:24 AM Heather: I could ask you know what you think you want to get out of the Knoxville meeting, but I think we'll hold off on a big discussion about that till next week, once your feet are more deeply into your projects
good to know, Nic other thoughts or questions about that? Sarah: and, the knoxville meeting might be a good time to "report" on our june 30 milestones, rather than being redundant Heather: yes Valerie: I definitely agree
9:25 AM Heather: fyi, Todd and I will both be in Portland OR at the end of june, for the Evolution and ievobio conferences 9:26 AM so at least two people on the team won't be remote from each other for a week or so lol
Valerie: ah, I hope you enjoy Portland (I used to live there)
9:27 AM Heather: I definitely will! I've visited, and have friends there. great town. Thanks, Valerie.
ok, next.... abstracts. Just wanted to put a plug in for a research approach that many people swear by.... writing your abstracts before you've finished the work.
9:28 AM Often very instructive about where to focus your research. Anyone have experience doing that?
Valerie: I agree (not so much from experience in science writing, but in general) Sarah: i've used that as a good trick for conferences where i haven't collected all my data yet.
9:29 AM but i have yet to try it for manuscripts...i usually save the abstract for last
Heather: yes. It is probably a case of writing it first, throwing that version away when you have your data, and then writing it again last,,,,,
9:30 AM Nicholas: I think I have a similar approach,, not in the form of an abstract, but a mock-up of what I expect to gather and how I can discuss this clearly
Heather: cool. ok, well consider this a nudge to give it a try when you need a break from data collection someday soon. and when you do, circulate it around to us for visibility, feedback.
9:31 AM (that sort of thing makes me want us to have a box somewhere saying "collaborators, look at these pages" or something. hrm)
Valerie: definitely (since this is my first time doing this) Heather: ok.
9:32 AM stats.
who has experience running stats? who doesn't? what software packages have you used? has anyone used SAS or SPSS or R? Sarah: R primer (ecological, multivariate....expensive) Nicholas: I do not
9:33 AM Sarah: excel packages (extensions?)
Valerie: I have not had experience with any of them. Sarah: access (custom) R's good b/c open access Heather: so we've got a range of experience. That'll work. Sarah: and almost always has a package written for the thing you want to do
9:34 AM Heather: yup... so I'm thinking we standarize on R for this project. Makes sense, you think, Sarah?
it has a bit of a steep learning curve, but we'll help you up it Nic and Valerie Sarah: yeah the programming isn't too bad Valerie: excellent, thanks Sarah: i have a good tutorial that i can dig up from a past class Heather: it makes stat analysis very transparent and easy to reuse and redo
9:35 AM Sarah: yeah. we could easily post our coding
and input files Heather: and will be a great tool for you in your future life yup Sarah: plus, it's easy to download Nicholas: I need more experience so I'm up for it Sarah: packages and the software itself Heather: that would be great, sarah. I'll try to post a few helpful intros too. There are oodles on the web. Sarah: i'm not an expert, but I like learning new things in it Heather: fyi, googling for "R" is problamatic but "R-project" is useful Sarah: or cran r Valerie: cool, good to know
9:36 AM I'm still on Windows XP
is that an issue? Sarah: nope Heather: or there is a specific R google engine, I'll post a link nope, R is on everything Sarah: it's basic code, not platform dependent Valerie: ah Heather: Nic, what OS are you on, fmi? Sarah, you are on a Windows machine? Nicholas: mac os x Sarah: windows Nicholas: I have access to a pc though Sarah: running windows 7 but used to run on xp i think r works for mac too
9:37 AM Heather: ok. Good. installation a bit different obviously but no problem
Nicholas: xp on my pc Sarah: though, i know some people in my class ran into weird quirks Heather: yup it does. I'm on a mac, osx great. then if/when you need a break from data collection, you can install R and look around a bit. we'lll post some links.
9:38 AM Nicholas: excellent
Heather: running stats in R also means that we can cheat forward about planning and coding statistical analsis before all of the data is in since you write a script, you can do it and test it on pilot data or dummy data.... then rerun it once all your real data is in. handy for overlapping projects like ours, I think
9:39 AM Sarah: and for iterative analyses
Heather: anyway, we won't dive full into R just yet because important to focus on data collection right now I think, just wanted to give you some info on future yes Sarah: i'll send along the tutorial Valerie: ok, thanks Heather: great Nicholas: thanks Heather: related question.
9:40 AM has anyone used source control before? subversion, cvs, git? or know what I'm talking about? :)
Sarah: not a clue Valerie: have no idea Heather: no problem.
9:41 AM Nicholas: nope
Heather: so source control is a way that programmers keep track of all of the versions of their computer source code Valerie: is it like version control? Heather: themselves, as they change things, and between coworkers when there are many people working on the same project yes, exactly. it is version control for computer source code
9:42 AM anyway, I don't know for sure that we will go there... but as we develop R scripts, it is a "best practice" to keep them under version control
plus it would help us!
9:43 AM Valerie: will there be file naming conventions?
Heather: so we'll see how it goes, but I'd like to see if we can keep track of our scripts using git and github valerie, maybe, but source control makes naming conventions a bit less important. version information is stored in metadata around the files.
9:44 AM we could post the R scripts directly in our OWW pages, but git (for example) is better designed for this kind of thing, kind of like google spreadsheets are better designed for sharing tabular data 9:45 AM ok, well, enough on that for now, I'll look to see if there is a really simple way we can work this into our R workflow.
Any questions about all of that? Sarah: nope. it's over my head, but i'll figure it out when we get there
9:46 AM Heather: I'm guessing we'll come back to thinking about stats, at least as methods, in the next week or three.
Valerie: I'm sure I'll have questions along the way Nicholas: same here -- I'm going to need this over the next year so I'd appreciate digging into this summer Heather: great! ok. so the only other thing on my list to cover is data coordination.
9:47 AM Sarah: did you see my additions to that?
i linked up the ss i shared so we can talk about them Heather: I didn't Sarah, sorry. Valerie: I have the ss open Sarah: maybe just refresh the agenda page Heather: got it
9:48 AM Valerie: I added the fields for Journal ISSN, year and volume to my ss 9:49 AM Sarah: i'm wondering if you can maybe use this exact ss (just your own copy)....that would make our field standardization easier even if you don't use all the fields
and by standardization, i also mean eventual combination Valerie: ok Sarah: i dunno, just a thought i don't want you to have to conform to my system per say that's why i put it on the doc so we can both modify it
9:50 AM and i indicated what fields match with your existing fields
Valerie: I'm not sure how I would switch around the information, but I could do that Sarah: i have to reanalyze some of my articles to make mine fit too, i expected that would happen in these early stages Heather: Valerie, if you experimented with using your own copy of this exact SS and then figured out whether there were things about it that woudl need to change a bit to work for you....
9:51 AM could definitely make data combination easy later.
Valerie: ok the one labeled DataONECitationsMETADATA? Sarah: that's for everyone Valerie: or the second one? Sarah: just to cover basic fields not necessarily where we keep data just to make sure everyone is getting the fields that will be necessary to link our data in the future
9:52 AM so, the SharedFields sheet has all the fields we need for articles from the Metadata ss
Heather: so Valerie, it would be your own copy of the 2nd sheet, the SharedFields sheet Valerie: oh, ok
9:53 AM got it
Sarah: nic, have you looked at the Metadata sheet? Heather: (and you could obviously delete the columns that weren't relevant to your extraction, if they got in the way) Sarah: it looks like most of what you are collecting is on par already Nicholas: Im looking now Sarah: but we do need to work out what you are collecting about citation policies Heather: Valerie, have a look and see what you think and maybe chat with Sarah about it later today so you guys can tweek the relevant columns to work for both of you? Nicholas: issue volume and funder are out of scope... I think I'm covering everything else though
9:54 AM Sarah: will you be covering funder eventually?
i thought that was under you Nicholas: it is Sarah: but it's not super impt i can just classify as public or private for each article that is Nicholas: but collecting the funding of a journal is not applicable or an article I mean
9:55 AM Sarah: what do you mean?
I collect the funding info for each article Nicholas: right and I collect the metadata for the funder and the policy for the funder Sarah: ok but you haven't quite delved into that, right? from what i saw on your ss
9:56 AM Nicholas: no not at all
I did an initial sample to see if there would be enough there, and it seemed like there would be so I've kept it in my scope today I'm hoping to finish most of the ecology journals
9:57 AM and if I find good policy I'll send you the names
Heather: whooosh you go, Nic! Nicholas: yup Sarah: ok, meaning citation policy? or funding? Nicholas: yeah citation Sarah: ok. valerie (and I for that matter) is interested in rating an article according to if it meets the journal or depositories policy
9:58 AM so we need to figure out how to code the policy to match
can you send me the text of a good policy so i can look over it too? Nicholas: yes Sarah: that way we can figure out how our extraction fields can match with it to yield something meaningful
9:59 AM do the depositories have citation policies as well?
Valerie: some seem to Sarah: the ones i've seen mention accession at least
10:00 AM is nic or valerie collecting/coding those?
meaning the citation policies of depositories Nicholas: sharing policies are definitely present so far... but citation directions ( i.e cite this way) are very rare, in fact I think there is only one I've found so far that even mentions how one should cite data
10:01 AM Valerie: I started something awhile back, but I think Nic's doing it (unless I'm wrong)
Heather: There might be an advantage to holding off coding for a bit, until we have more raw data to understand the alternatives Sarah: can you send me a sharing policy too? i'm wondering what we can collect at the article level about that besides yn Heather: so collect the data now, but don't attempt to make it formally coded into categories yet. I'm not sure we know 100% what would be good categories.
10:02 AM Valerie: sure
Sarah: yeah, that's why i keep full text of any relevant excerpt Nicholas: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118512781/home/ForAuthors.html Sarah: but somethings i code now b/c it's easier while i'm fresh from the article Nicholas: this is cladistics sharing policy Sarah: thanks Nicholas: under subject matter
10:03 AM Sarah: thanks
Nicholas: http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcevolbiol/ifora/ Sarah: this is mostly concerned with the formats of the shared data files
10:04 AM should we record that from the articles?
Nicholas: in the metadata I am collecting, I am noting if formats are required Sarah: this seems like it's mostly for data sharing within the journal (i.e. internal)
10:05 AM Nicholas: These data will be made available to the referees but not to the community at large until such time as the paper is accepted.
Sarah: it seems a little silly for me to dig up data format info from each article, since I assume it's a requirement for even getting it posted
10:06 AM i.e. at cladistics, if you submit a .png file, they'll ask you for a .jpg or .gif instead
the editor should have to take care of that technicality b/c it probably has to do more with storage space etc Nicholas: I don't think you should collect that info Sarah: not data quality Heather: yeah, I think data format info can be outside our scope Nicholas: Im just noting it when I come across it
10:07 AM Sarah: what would be more interesting is if you came across a data metadata part of the policy, i.e. requiring detailed documentation of how to use the data file
but again, probably outside of the scope
10:08 AM Nicholas: well so far, that's not present in journal policy
Sarah: yeah, understandable is this the section of the BMC policy you wanted me to see: The Accession Numbers of any nucleic acid sequences, protein sequences or atomic coordinates cited in the manuscript should be provided, in square brackets and include the corresponding database name; for example, [EMBL:AB026295, EMBL:AC137000, DDBJ:AE000812, GenBank:U49845, PDB:1BFM, Swiss-Prot:Q96KQ7, PIR:S66116].
The databases for which we can provide direct links are: EMBL Nucleotide Sequence Database (EMBL), DNA Data Bank of Japan (DDBJ ), GenBank at the NCBI (GenBank), Protein Data Bank (PDB), Protein Information Resource (PIR) and the Swiss-Prot Protein Database (Swiss-Prot).
That's awesome (for our purposes)
10:09 AM that's what I was hoping we'd have for citation policies. unfortunately i don't have bmc on my journal list (but could if we want to focus on journals that have actual citation policies)
10:10 AM thus far, its the best one
Sarah: oh, and it keeps going on and on do my journals have comparable ones (or even any) am nat sysbio ecology molecular ecology i'm seeing major inconsistencies in molec ecology
under DATA Sarah: thanks is this recorded in your spreadsheet?
10:12 AM sorry, i haven't looked over it super throughly
Nicholas: yes line 3 Sarah: thanks i won't pester you anymore about that then. Nicholas: I need to put the full text in, since I did that journal I've revised my fields
10:13 AM Sarah: ok. and let me know if you find any other really good journals like bmc evo bio so i consider sampling at least a few of those articles
Nicholas: I will Sarah: great heather, what else did you want to discuss about data coordination?
10:14 AM Heather: one other thing
wanted to explicitly talk about article metadata, since it might help Valerie and Sarah, and might be something Nic could do specifically, Nic, I was thinking that there are some article metadata fields in ISI Web of Science or Scopus or similar
10:15 AM that would list all authors, corresponding author address, etc
things that Valerie and Sarah could extract, but might be more easily and cleanly pulled from other sources Easiest for Sarah's stuff, because it woudl just be issues a, b, c of journals x and y (or something)
10:16 AM Sarah: i'm finding it easiest just to pull from the article pdf
Heather: Harder for Valerie's because the spread of articles is wider. Thus might be more pain than it is worth to try for systematic crossreferencing. Sarah: but their are a few things on isi that i would like like funding source Valerie: same here. although I haven't been pulling the author address should I do that? Sarah: but my citation software isn't pulling it out Heather: No. Valerie: (also, sometimes I used the "et al." should I capture all author names?) Sarah: oh, i say yes to author address
10:17 AM Heather: So I think it might behoove us to have someone look into extracting the article metadata from a bibliographic source like ISI or Scopus
Sarah: for nationality and discipline of author...like heather's biomed study Heather: so Sarah I think yes we want it, bu tI think mostly no on Valerie extracting it because ideally we want to pull it systematically from somewhere Sarah: ok...having it auto extract from isi then yeah Heather: anyway, Nic, would you look into it?
10:18 AM Nicholas: yes
Sarah: i'll look into it to b/c i need to figure out a method for my random sample like we discussed previously and will be experimenting in isi Heather: great. thanks. Report back on what fields you can pull from which sources, how easy it is to export the data, your recommended approach
10:19 AM Nicholas: yes, sarah if you feel like it's something I can gather then pass it on 10:20 AM Heather: nic, I think you should do it too if you can... it is kind of parallel to other things you are doing, article metadata as opposed to journal metadata etc
Sarah: nic...are you familiar with scopus? or have access? i don't Nicholas: I have access Sarah: ok. i might, but i don't think so also, per heather's comment Heather: Nic I think your information science background would be great here :)
10:21 AM Sarah: i think nic could extract it and we link to it through doi, but also valerie and i might need it for populating our fields
Heather: Valerie, you might have ideas and direction suggestions too? If so, chime in Sarah: so it might be easier for us to collect once we figure out what can be collected Valerie: not really, I'm still just collecting data so far I have found a couple of interesting things Heather: Valerie, to your "et al" above.... I think leave it at et al, and I hope we can capture list of full authors (or at least count of athors) from ISI or Scopus or something
10:22 AM Valerie: ok
admittedly I don't have Scopus access but I have been using ISI a lot Heather: Sarah, yes on "once we know what can be extracted" good stuff, valerie.
10:23 AM cool. So Nic if you can have some info on that in the next day or two, I think it will help finalize a few data extraction fields for Sarah and Valerie.
Valerie: should I just stick to one depository for depth purposes? I sort of started on Pangaea Heather: Yes, great, do start on others Valerie: ok Heather: I think it will help you figure out different alternatives. Nicholas: I'm on it
10:24 AM Heather: I think starting with one and looking at it from different directions, then moving on to another, then maybe a third will help you finalize a set of search methods that you can then apply to all of them
Valerie: it's interesting to see the differences in how things are cited. it seems more likely that people cite the article originally tied to the data as opposed to the data itself Sarah: agreed Valerie: ok, that makes sense Sarah: that's coded in the new ss Heather: yes, definitely true for some datatypes.
10:25 AM Sarah: under "how cited" i believe 10:26 AM nic (as and aside) - i definitely don't have scopus. i'll look at isi today, but you should probably look too b/c you probably know more about extraction...we can compare fields later
Heather: cool. So Valerie, I'm thinking that in a few days? a week? I'm not sure... you have a list of five (or 3 or 10) search strings/methods you finalize on. is that consistent with what you were thinking? Valerie: sure Heather: they will not be perfect obviously and will still need manual review to separate Valerie: that sounds right since some search strings don't work as well when looking for citations of some repositories Heather: instances of shared data from instances of reuse... and they won't find all instances of reuse....
10:27 AM but comparing whhat they do find will be informative across databases and journals, I think. make sense?
Sarah: and, you can have my annotated articles for test search...just remind me when you need them i.e. i label them all as dataSharing or dataReuse Valerie: ok, thanks Sarah: and what depository i had trouble sending it the other day, but i'm sure we could figure it out Valerie: I'll upload my citations to connotea for your reference once I get more solid search hits ok Heather: Valerie, your project definitely has an upfront stage of exploration in a way that the other projects don't! Valerie: I've been searching for TreeBASE and Pangaea
10:28 AM if there's one more you're seeing a lot, I could search that too to make sure we have enough overlap
Heather: I'd add DAAC to your shorrt list too esp since there is some of the preliminary DOI reuse data from Bruce Valerie: oh yeah, the spreadsheet they sent us
10:29 AM I posted a link to that on my lab notebook page
Heather: you have that presentation and the related articles from Bob? yup so searching for those using DOIs might be very informative, for example. One other one, in case you wanted a fourth, would be Genbank Sarah: yeah Heather: just because it is so huge and well established, it will make for an interesting comparison Sarah: i see genbank the most
10:30 AM i think b/c scientists are used to it
Valerie: ok, so DAAC, then Genbank after Pangaea (time permitting) Heather: yup. Valerie: ok
10:31 AM Heather: great.
anything else people want to talk abut today? Sarah: nope. Valerie: I'm good for now Heather: Valerie and Sarah I'm guessing you guys will pow-wow later today on tweaking fields so they work for both of you Valerie: yeah Heather: Nic, we'll here from you in the next few days about article metadata hear
10:32 AM Nicholas: yes
Sarah: oh wait...heather, can i just verify that you got my "plan of action" email to the mentors....i haven't got any feedback yet. Heather: I'll post a blog yes, I did Sarah! Nice details Nicholas: I think I can extract a lot of citation info from scopus Heather: I wont' be too surprised if you don't hear anything Sarah: i've got article metadata from isi...i'll send to nic right now and all i guess Nicholas: thanks Heather: so in that case.... proceed. Sarah: ok.
10:33 AM i'm sticking with sysbio right now...seems like the safest in terms of good citation policy, interest, etc
but then i'll move onto the others unless i hear otherwise Heather: sounds good sarah. Sysbio is weird because it has been more data sharing heavy than the rest but that makes it important to include
10:34 AM Sarah: but good in that regard then
Heather: yes Sarah: yeah. okay sorry to prolong the chat Heather: ok! I'll be around... feel free to ping me for a chat whenever Valerie: neat. will d o Heather: I'll be keeping tabs on the OWW stuff
10:35 AM otherwise shall we just plan to reconnect on Monday?
Sarah: or wed? Valerie: sounds good for either Sarah: what will our regular meeting time(s) be? Heather: Yup, so could just be Tuesday for the whole-group telecon, unless you see value in something scheduled before then
10:36 AM I think there might be value in a meeting on Monday
since we are still getting data collection stuff finalized Nicholas: I agree Sarah: sure Valerie: ok
10:37 AM Heather: Monday 9am pacific, again? Valerie, your poor lunchtime.
Valerie: eh, it's fine I eat at my desk if I'm not at the library anyway
10:38 AM and I tend to eat a later lunch/dinner
Heather: ok, good. don't wait on spontaneous chats though but will reconnect for sure on Monday at 9am pacific.
10:39 AM Valerie: ok, excellent. I'll send any questions I have prior to that
Heather: wishing you many productive data extraction vibes until then :) Valerie: thanks
10:40 AM Heather: bye!
Nicholas: bye Heather has left Valerie: bye Valerie has left Nicholas has left