W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > May 2007

correction: pending Soc. for Neuro abstract - due: Tues. 5/15 by 5 PM EDT

From: William Bug <William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 01:46:51 -0400
Message-Id: <24DC2F2A-8BB5-48E7-BFDA-0E14BAF6B822@DrexelMed.edu>
To: public-semweb-lifesci hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Ooops - my bad.

It's due this Tuesday, 5/15 by 5 PM EDT (http://www.sfn.org/am2007/? 
pagename=call_for_abstracts).

Got my wires crossed with another meeting submission I'm working.

I'd also add the last 8 hours of submission time tend to be a really  
big problem.  SfN in the past hasn't paid nearly enough for the  
hosting service they use.  There are ~15K presentations for 30K of  
participants at a typical SfN annual meeting.  You can imagine the  
sort of last minute crunch that can cause.  Last year, when trying to  
login in to the abstract submission system on the last day (two phase  
login to actually get to the content management/editing system), each  
phase of the login could take > 20 minutes to return when you clicked  
on it, if it didn't time out altogether.

Here are:
	rules for submission
		http://www.sfn.org/am2007/index.cfm?pagename=rules_for_submission
	submission instructions
		http://www.sfn.org/am2007/index.cfm?pagename=submission_instructions

Here's a new comment they've added this year to author submission  
instructions:
"We strongly suggest that you enter the submission site and begin  
your submission well in advance of the deadline. The submission  
process is very detailed and requires the entry of very specific  
information (including email addresses of co-authors and their  
conflict of disclosure information). The primary cause of error in  
abstract submission occurs when the user is not familiar with the  
submission site and must rush to submit the work on the last day that  
the site is open."

This means we're really going to have to resolve authorship on  
Monday.  I hope that's not impractical.

Cheers,
Bill

On May 13, 2007, at 1:07 AM, William Bug wrote:

> Woohoo!!!
>
> I wish I knew that last week when filing a grant progress report.  ;-)
>
> But seriously Kei, that's wonderful news.
>
> To jump on the momentum bandwagon, on Don's request, I've distilled  
> the Banff presentations and written a SfN abstract (due this Thu)  
> combining that as best I could with a summary of what Matthias &  
> Don had written already.
>
> SfN abstract limits are measured in characters (2300 chars - minus  
> white space) - but including title, abstract, authors, and  
> address.  This current summary at the top of the Google Doc we'd  
> been nurturing through last week (http://docs.google.com/Doc? 
> id=dgk2mvhp_0fmftbb) is now up to ~3800 chars without authors and  
> addresses (NOTE: citations are not necessary, nor are they typical  
> for SfN abstract submissions).
>
> Right now, Don, Matthias, Alan, Susie, and I all have access rights  
> to the doc.  Anyone wishing to participate, please don't hesitate  
> to ask to be added to the list of collaborators.  All you need to  
> do is pass on an active Google account email, and any one of us can  
> add you as a collaborator.  If you don't want "write" access but  
> only want to read what's there, you can be added as a 'viewer'.   
> They've also recently added the ability to add all the members of a  
> mailing list as collaborators or viewers (up to 200 people - and  
> only 10 can edit simultaneously - see http://docs.google.com/ 
> support/bin/answer.py?answer=66343&topic=8628)
>
> Hopefully, this summary abstract can provide a final high-water  
> mark from which over the next few days we can distill a trimmed  
> abstract coming in under the wire.
>
> To be honest, I think we have enough here for 2 SfN submissions -  
> but I'm not certain yet how to split it - or whether we should just  
> trim it to one.  We'd also need a second SfN member/sponsor to be  
> first author beyond what Don has committed to do for this  
> abstract.  I'm committed on another abstract, and you can only be  
> "presenting"/first author on one abstract.  "Presenting"/first  
> authors must be SfN full or student members.
>
> We should also give some thought as to which sessions we'd want to  
> submit to, and whether we'd want to request to give a talk or a  
> poster.  The typical thing when you have >1 submission on a related  
> research effort is to have one of each.
>
> Congratulations again to all - both on the successful Banff demo,  
> Banff HCLS session, and the actual publication of the BMC manuscript!
>
> Cheers,
> Bill
>
>
> On May 12, 2007, at 3:41 PM, Kei Cheung wrote:
>
>> Adding to the milestones, the SWHCLS paper was just officially  
>> published in the special issue "Semantic e-Science in Biomedicine"  
>> of BMC Bioinformatics.  See the URL below.
>>
>> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2105/8/S3/S2
>>
>> Let's keep the momentum going!
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> -Kei
>>
>> William Bug wrote:
>>
>>> Vunderbar!
>>>
>>> Thanks to all who worked hard to pull this off!
>>>
>>> It's hard to get the full impact just perusing the slides, but it  
>>> looks to me that you pulled together a very compelling demo that  
>>> examined several questions of biological relevance to  
>>> neuroscientists studying neurodegenerative disease (AD in  
>>> particular).
>>>
>>> I also really like the list breakdown of tools to target  
>>> different aspects of the overall development - e.g., Pellet,  
>>> Jena, Perfuse, etc.
>>>
>>> I think this will be a fantastic base to build off for ISMB (and  
>>> SfN).
>>>
>>> Kudos!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> On May 11, 2007, at 2:18 PM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have updated the page http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLS/ 
>>>> Banff2007Demo with slides, pointers to the triple store etc.
>>>>
>>>> -Alan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bill Bug
>>> Senior Research Analyst/Ontological Engineer
>>>
>>> Laboratory for Bioimaging  & Anatomical Informatics
>>> www.neuroterrain.org
>>> Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy
>>> Drexel University College of Medicine
>>> 2900 Queen Lane
>>> Philadelphia, PA    19129
>>> 215 991 8430 (ph)
>>> 610 457 0443 (mobile)
>>> 215 843 9367 (fax)
>>>
>>>
>>> Please Note: I now have a new email - William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu  
>>> <mailto:William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> Bill Bug
> Senior Research Analyst/Ontological Engineer
>
> Laboratory for Bioimaging  & Anatomical Informatics
> www.neuroterrain.org
> Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy
> Drexel University College of Medicine
> 2900 Queen Lane
> Philadelphia, PA    19129
> 215 991 8430 (ph)
> 610 457 0443 (mobile)
> 215 843 9367 (fax)
>
>
> Please Note: I now have a new email - William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu
>
>
>
>



Bill Bug
Senior Research Analyst/Ontological Engineer

Laboratory for Bioimaging  & Anatomical Informatics
www.neuroterrain.org
Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy
Drexel University College of Medicine
2900 Queen Lane
Philadelphia, PA    19129
215 991 8430 (ph)
610 457 0443 (mobile)
215 843 9367 (fax)


Please Note: I now have a new email - William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu





Received on Sunday, 13 May 2007 05:44:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:20:26 UTC