- From: M. Scott Marshall <mscottmarshall@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 15:12:41 +0200
- To: linkedlifedatapracticesnote@googlegroups.com, HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
The next LODD teleconference would normally have been today. I have a conflict so I didn't announce. If folks still want to call in, please go ahead and discuss the W3C note. Richard Boyce has given us the seed material by transforming the submitted article into a Google Doc and now people are discussing how to approach the W3C note. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XzdsjCfPylcyOoNtDfAgz15HwRdCD-0e0ixh21_U0y0/edit?hl=en_US Regardless of whether you decide to call in today, please take the time to add comments to the above doc. If you want There is an ongoing discussion about whether to put the technical material up front (as it was in our original submission) or leave it like it is. Cheers, Scott mikel.egana.aranguren 9:52 AM Sep 30 It seems to me that this structure (Case studies and then questions) is not appropriate for an W3C note, I would do it the other way around. Someone with more experience w.r.t W3C notes should say mscottmarshall 10:01 AM Sep 30 Ironic - we originally wrote the article in that order but a reviewer suggested that we change it around. :) helenadeus 10:32 AM Oct 3 Agree with Mikel (despite opinions of reviewers) ... someone reading a paper is looking for a nice intro and then the technical stuff; someone reading a w3c note, on the other hand, wants the technical stuff right away so that they avoid wasting time reading things they already know are important -- M. Scott Marshall http://staff.science.uva.nl/~marshall
Received on Wednesday, 5 October 2011 13:13:09 UTC