Difference between revisions of "E-lab notebooks"
From CURATEcamp
(→e-Lab Notebooks and OMERO - image curation (http://openmicroscopy.org/site)) |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Notes by Lynn Yarmey: | Notes by Lynn Yarmey: | ||
− | + | e-Lab Notebooks and OMERO - image curation (http://openmicroscopy.org/site)=== | |
− | |||
− | |||
Discussed relationship with DMPs | Discussed relationship with DMPs | ||
− | + | ===Issues:=== | |
*people keep notebooks for many different purposes, have separate styles | *people keep notebooks for many different purposes, have separate styles | ||
*extracting something from a notebook is dicey to start - so be clear on goal. For example: patent suit, 7Mil to go through paper notebooks consideration - can you prove provenance from burned CD copy? | *extracting something from a notebook is dicey to start - so be clear on goal. For example: patent suit, 7Mil to go through paper notebooks consideration - can you prove provenance from burned CD copy? | ||
− | + | ===Selection criteria:=== | |
*affordability | *affordability | ||
Line 21: | Line 19: | ||
*curation components - export files, metadata standardization | *curation components - export files, metadata standardization | ||
− | Examples: | + | ===Examples:=== |
*CERF (by Rescentris) | *CERF (by Rescentris) | ||
*Cambridge Soft (owns ChemDraw) - downside, cost plus lots of backend infrastrcuture; somewhat of a layer over Word and Excel. Cambridgesoft was recently bought by Perkin Elmer | *Cambridge Soft (owns ChemDraw) - downside, cost plus lots of backend infrastrcuture; somewhat of a layer over Word and Excel. Cambridgesoft was recently bought by Perkin Elmer | ||
*Wiki + Google docs; digital lives study found big problems with legalities in cloud agreements, no promises about longevity, security, etc. | *Wiki + Google docs; digital lives study found big problems with legalities in cloud agreements, no promises about longevity, security, etc. | ||
+ | *University of Southampton projects with chemistry lab notebooks | ||
− | Open Science vs. Other research approaches | + | ===Open Science vs. Other research approaches=== |
Costs - how to compete with Amazon in terms of cost feasibility for basic file storage. | Costs - how to compete with Amazon in terms of cost feasibility for basic file storage. | ||
Line 35: | Line 34: | ||
*cloud-based applications | *cloud-based applications | ||
− | Additional criteria | + | ===Additional criteria=== |
* uptake | * uptake | ||
Line 41: | Line 40: | ||
* files on disk | * files on disk | ||
− | Issue - as soon as you export from a | + | Issue - as soon as you export from a system to another system (ie. from lab notebook to an archive), you are creating a representation that isn’t usually round-tripable. So what exactly are you archiving? Tension between archival version and actual work. |
Revision as of 00:53, 16 August 2011
Notes by Lynn Yarmey: e-Lab Notebooks and OMERO - image curation (http://openmicroscopy.org/site)===
Discussed relationship with DMPs
Contents
Issues:
- people keep notebooks for many different purposes, have separate styles
- extracting something from a notebook is dicey to start - so be clear on goal. For example: patent suit, 7Mil to go through paper notebooks consideration - can you prove provenance from burned CD copy?
Selection criteria:
- affordability
- ease of use
- ease of access
- length of trial
- non-pharmaceutical-based
- needs to work for users
- curation components - export files, metadata standardization
Examples:
- CERF (by Rescentris)
- Cambridge Soft (owns ChemDraw) - downside, cost plus lots of backend infrastrcuture; somewhat of a layer over Word and Excel. Cambridgesoft was recently bought by Perkin Elmer
- Wiki + Google docs; digital lives study found big problems with legalities in cloud agreements, no promises about longevity, security, etc.
- University of Southampton projects with chemistry lab notebooks
Open Science vs. Other research approaches
Costs - how to compete with Amazon in terms of cost feasibility for basic file storage.
Phil recommends cloud for virtual machines for pulling out the data from boxes under the desk
- need applications that are compatible
- cloud-based applications
Additional criteria
- uptake
- backend maintenance (in addition to production archival copy)
- files on disk
Issue - as soon as you export from a system to another system (ie. from lab notebook to an archive), you are creating a representation that isn’t usually round-tripable. So what exactly are you archiving? Tension between archival version and actual work.