User:Macowell/Registry Development meetings
From 2007.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
(→Registry) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== 08-01-07 == | == 08-01-07 == | ||
| + | '''Crystallization goals for Short Term''': | ||
| + | Do the things within our reach to ''make the registry better'' and ''make the iGEM teams more successful''. | ||
| + | |||
===Registry=== | ===Registry=== | ||
| - | |||
To do this, we need to have a good picture and understand how the teams are doing, how they are working, how they are using the registry now. | To do this, we need to have a good picture and understand how the teams are doing, how they are working, how they are using the registry now. | ||
| + | * '''Devices & Systems''' - unclear to teams what they do with the big parts of their projects | ||
| + | ** if you make a project, what part type/device/category is that; imagine a "projects done by iGEM teams" page or table on the registry | ||
| + | ** have a "rethink Devices & Systems" | ||
| + | * '''Featured parts''' - Focus on the next user | ||
| + | ** perhaps ask team to make an abstract for logical sets collections of their parts that could be used in the featured part page; perhaps related to Devices & Systems | ||
| + | * '''Favorite part button''' - don't overhaul part promotion process, just simplify process of making parts "favorited" | ||
| + | * '''Tools''': Sequence analysis 90% done; teams could use it to verify their parts quickly by uploading their sequencing runs to the registry | ||
| + | * '''Documentation of parts''' - need guidelines; (and must make sure they are effective; randy thinks they won't be "by themselves") | ||
| + | ** Need published guidelines for doing good documentation | ||
| + | ** Need clear incentive for team to make good documentation for its parts | ||
| + | ** Need clear examples of good documentation & bad documentation | ||
| + | ** Rework part types (back to the devices & systems) | ||
| + | * '''Part Promotion Process''' - Quick fix by tying it to the favoriting process, or spend 1.5 weeks building the real promotion mechanism | ||
| + | * '''Part DNA''' | ||
| + | ** Acquisition of DNA - how do we optimize getting it | ||
| + | ** Sequence analysis | ||
| - | + | ===iGEM Teams=== | |
| - | + | * '''Psuedo Ambassador Program''' - everyone acts as an ambassador to their own subset of all the teams, figuring out what their status & progress is | |
| - | + | ** Have meeting twice a week to review, decide how to help | |
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
* Silent teams - figure out what teams are "silent" | * Silent teams - figure out what teams are "silent" | ||
| - | + | ** intervention | |
Revision as of 15:33, 2 August 2007
08-01-07
Crystallization goals for Short Term: Do the things within our reach to make the registry better and make the iGEM teams more successful.
Registry
To do this, we need to have a good picture and understand how the teams are doing, how they are working, how they are using the registry now.
- Devices & Systems - unclear to teams what they do with the big parts of their projects
- if you make a project, what part type/device/category is that; imagine a "projects done by iGEM teams" page or table on the registry
- have a "rethink Devices & Systems"
- Featured parts - Focus on the next user
- perhaps ask team to make an abstract for logical sets collections of their parts that could be used in the featured part page; perhaps related to Devices & Systems
- Favorite part button - don't overhaul part promotion process, just simplify process of making parts "favorited"
- Tools: Sequence analysis 90% done; teams could use it to verify their parts quickly by uploading their sequencing runs to the registry
- Documentation of parts - need guidelines; (and must make sure they are effective; randy thinks they won't be "by themselves")
- Need published guidelines for doing good documentation
- Need clear incentive for team to make good documentation for its parts
- Need clear examples of good documentation & bad documentation
- Rework part types (back to the devices & systems)
- Part Promotion Process - Quick fix by tying it to the favoriting process, or spend 1.5 weeks building the real promotion mechanism
- Part DNA
- Acquisition of DNA - how do we optimize getting it
- Sequence analysis
iGEM Teams
- Psuedo Ambassador Program - everyone acts as an ambassador to their own subset of all the teams, figuring out what their status & progress is
- Have meeting twice a week to review, decide how to help
- Silent teams - figure out what teams are "silent"
- intervention
