Planning meeting in CSHL
Andrea Splendiani
for the ones attending the CSHL meeting, don't you think it would be
good to have a conf. call or some other activity to organize some
parallel schedule ?
Just a few hints:
*) I think we need some time for after-manchester discussions
*) I don't think it is reasonable to take more than 3 hours off from
the other group. They have quite a lot of things to do in 2 days, and
if we want to be collaborative... I think they need to conclude what
they wanted this meeting for.
So I guess we should have a parallel session for OWL stuff, present
intro & results in 1+1 hours + 1 hours of discussion, agree on a
"common DX session", and split the rest.
That's my "draft" idea.
Any comments ?
ciao,
Andrea
Alan Ruttenberg
that day 1 be DX and day 2 be other things, including the Manchester
discussion. There was some expressed desire to not have parallel
sessions, which I think is fine as long as adequate time is given.
Also, I note that there are quite a few non-dx types at the workshop,
so I want to find out what they are interested in too.
I've written some notes on the CHSL meeting page.
But push comes to shove and I agree - we should have a parallel session.
-Alan
Andrea Splendiani
to agree on the DX proposal.
At the end, this was the original focus of the meeting, now it is
open to the whole community and this is good, but still this
shouldn't mean that with interfere with the DX track.
The problem is not to have one day for OWL, but I think that one day
for the DX will be not enough. Though maybe you can talk with them on
tuesday about their needs.
We may cut on personal presentatons and introductions to biopax,
maybe, since I guess all the people there will be somehow introduced,
this may save a few hours.
But if they planned two day, that's what they needed and I think we
should not interfere too much at this point. Makeing our point in
perspective and with the whole group, and leave them work. So as far
as I can see some sort of parallelism is quite necessary...
Another solution would be to add one-two days aftrer the meeting for
OWL-workout (sounds nice....), maybe at S.K., and take just a couple
of hours at the meeing.
ciao,
Andrea
Just repeating for the third time: I think it's important that the
people that wanted this meeting on DX have the time to work on their
goals, otherwise we will not help, but interfere...
Il giorno 29/mag/06, alle ore 21:34, Alan Ruttenberg ha scritto:
Joanne Luciano
> -----Original Message-----
> From: BioPAX-M...@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:BioPAX-M...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Alan
> Ruttenberg
> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2006 8:34 PM
> To: BioPAX-M...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: Planning meeting in CSHL
>
>
> I'm trying to set up a meeting with them for tuesday.
Do you need more voices? Would it be better to have this discussion on
biopax-discuss? So that those interested can be heard and responded to
by appropriate allocation of time?
> I'm
> suggesting that day 1 be DX and day 2 be other things,
> including the Manchester discussion. There was some expressed
> desire to not have parallel sessions, which I think is fine
> as long as adequate time is given.
Andrea, is BioPAX supporting your travel?
> Also, I note that there are quite a few non-dx types at the
> workshop, so I want to find out what they are interested in too.
I haven't checked, but it may be necessary to contact them directly
if they are not on BioPAX discuss.
> I've written some notes on the CHSL meeting page.
>
> But push comes to shove and I agree - we should have a
> parallel session.
I would support an parallel session rather than none.
Can we get a list of those interested in BioPAX-DL?
Andrea Splendiani
Il giorno 30/mag/06, alle ore 14:44, Joanne Luciano ha scritto:
>
> Do you need more voices? Would it be better to have this
> discussion on
> biopax-discuss? So that those interested can be heard and responded to
> by appropriate allocation of time?
>
>> I'm
>> suggesting that day 1 be DX and day 2 be other things,
>> including the Manchester discussion. There was some expressed
>> desire to not have parallel sessions, which I think is fine
>> as long as adequate time is given.
>
> Andrea, is BioPAX supporting your travel?
Yes, seems so.
>
>> Also, I note that there are quite a few non-dx types at the
>> workshop, so I want to find out what they are interested in too.
>
> I haven't checked, but it may be necessary to contact them directly
> if they are not on BioPAX discuss.
>
>> I've written some notes on the CHSL meeting page.
>>
>> But push comes to shove and I agree - we should have a
>> parallel session.
>
> I would support an parallel session rather than none.
I think the point is not a parallel session rather then nothing... we
really have a too short time for all the things we would need to
discuss in 2 days.
Two days risk not to be enough even for the DX track...
Furthermore the problem is that we need to introduce things...
Maybe the best option would be check if OWL-ed people can stay one
day more in NY. I can. This would make things work better.
Another idea would be to have after-dinner OWL sessions... that more
hakish... and close to actual owls...
I think the points of having a joint CHSL meeting are:
1) To contribute/discuss the DX standard, so that we don't work on
two completely separate track
2) Give a message to the community about the manchester outcome. If
we can do this in 1+1 hours, that would be perfect. We don't need
much... think about this... a few will undresteand in such a limited
time.
We can just provide some example of intergation, error checkings and
queries. This would be tremedously effective, then we can discuss the
roadmap and next meeting can be more OWL-sound.
Comments ?
>
> Can we get a list of those interested in BioPAX-DL?
Meybe we can post a question on BioPAX-discuss... also asking if
interested people is able to spend one day more in NY or loose some
hour of sleep :)
ciao,
Andrea
Joanne Luciano
> -----Original Message-----
> From: BioPAX-M...@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:BioPAX-M...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of
> Andrea Splendiani
> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 2:16 PM
> To: BioPAX-M...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: Planning meeting in CSHL
>
>
>
> Il giorno 30/mag/06, alle ore 14:44, Joanne Luciano ha scritto:
>
> >
> > Do you need more voices? Would it be better to have this
> discussion
> > on biopax-discuss? So that those interested can be heard
> and responded
> > to by appropriate allocation of time?
> >
> >> I'm
> >> suggesting that day 1 be DX and day 2 be other things,
> including the
> >> Manchester discussion. There was some expressed desire to not have
> >> parallel sessions, which I think is fine as long as
> adequate time is
> >> given.
> >
> > Andrea, is BioPAX supporting your travel?
> Yes, seems so.
Good.
>
> >
> >> Also, I note that there are quite a few non-dx types at
> the workshop,
> >> so I want to find out what they are interested in too.
> >
> > I haven't checked, but it may be necessary to contact them
> directly if
> > they are not on BioPAX discuss.
> >
> >> I've written some notes on the CHSL meeting page.
> >>
> >> But push comes to shove and I agree - we should have a parallel
> >> session.
> >
> > I would support an parallel session rather than none.
> I think the point is not a parallel session rather then
> nothing... we really have a too short time for all the things
> we would need to discuss in 2 days.
You're right. I missed the point and agree with the points
made below.
> Two days risk not to be enough even for the DX track...
I agree. It's one of the reasons I've been advocating for getting
development funding for BioPAX.
> Furthermore the problem is that we need to introduce things...
Yes, I agree.
> Maybe the best option would be check if OWL-ed people can
> stay one day more in NY. I can. This would make things work better.
> Another idea would be to have after-dinner OWL sessions...
> that more hakish... and close to actual owls...
I can stay. Others....
>
> I think the points of having a joint CHSL meeting are:
>
> 1) To contribute/discuss the DX standard, so that we don't
> work on two completely separate track
> 2) Give a message to the community about the manchester
> outcome.
Outcome and on-going process. We can show a progression from
Alan's comments last summer, my work in Oct/Nov, the Japan meeting
and the April Meeting.
> If we can do this in 1+1 hours, that would be
> perfect. We don't need much... think about this... a few will
> undresteand in such a limited time.
>
> We can just provide some example of intergation, error
> checkings and queries. This would be tremedously effective,
> then we can discuss the roadmap and next meeting can be more
> OWL-sound.
>
>
> Comments ?
Sounds good, go for it.
Joanne