- From: Donald Doherty <donald.doherty@brainstage.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 18:11:35 -0400
- To: "'William Bug'" <William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu>, "'public-semweb-lifesci hcls'" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <00b001c79674$d7c2d070$2f01a8c0@Brainstage>
I'm almost caught up!
We do have two days, if I remember correctly, for revisions. So, as long as
we get this in we have some time to revise.
Is there anyone out there that hasn't been added to the Google Docs and
would still like to be?
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of William Bug
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 1:47 AM
To: public-semweb-lifesci hcls
Subject: correction: pending Soc. for Neuro abstract - due: Tues. 5/15 by 5
PM EDT
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
<http://docs.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=66343&topic=8628>
&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 Monday, 14 May 2007 22:05:12 UTC