Hi Charles, Thijs, Andreas and the rest, On Monday 08 January 2007 10:41, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > Hi Charles and the rest, > On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 17:46 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > + > > +Tag: suite::debian-med::bio > > +Description: med-bio > > + This package is installed, recommended or suggested by the med-bio > > metapackage. [...] > I do not think that "suite" is the right choice, tagging with "field" is > much more useful; as you can see, under "field" are such fields as > astronomy, biology and chemistry already available. Adding > "field::medicine" would be useful to me, and to put subclasses of > medicine below it: If I'd have a veto then I would use it against a very early suggestion of field::medicine::bio(logy). > examples: > > field::medicine:pharmacy fine > field::medicine:imaging I do not like this one as imaging is a technology rather than a subfield like vets or pharmacy. Radiologists, dermatologists and many other disciplines have tons of images. But admittedly I do not see a way around it, really, as we are all used to talk about "medical imaging" as a field. > field::medicine:practice fine, I would not mind "information systems" instead of practice, though. > field::medicine:veterinary fine For fields::biology I see be the subfields fields::biology::sequence fields::biology::sequence::dna fields::biology::sequence::rna fields::biology::sequence::protein fields::biology::structure fields::biology::interaction fields::biology::genomics fields::biology::proteomics fields::biology::metabolomics I would like to combine these tags with something like ::search (ok, I just found use::searching, this will do) ::alignment (how about use::comparison and use::comparison::alignment, then?) Suggestions? Molecular pathways I see within ::interaction. Gene regulation depends, most likely it would be genomics. Charles? > But well, I leave the final decision to the debtags developers, since > they are most known with the design of the tags database. But please, > whatever it is, decide on it somewhere soon so we can start :) There is more to it. E.g. I am missing something like use::analysis . First I though about "use::research", but then thought that this is nonsense. The existing use::checking would come later once one has a hypothesis generated, Then there is at least for my qtdmm package use::measuring hardware::input::dmm for Digital Multi Meter works-with::device missing. Measuring semantically goes next to the existing use::monitor but at least to me means something different. Or is it use::scanning in terms of data sampling? Ah, right and on formats. The following come to mind: works-with-format::biology::fasta works-with-format::biology::aln works-with-format::biology::pdb works-with-format::biology::embl (EMBL-format works both for protein and nucleotide sequences) works-with-format::biology::... And something else I missed, particularly for the emerging workflow utilities: scope::utility:wrappable, in the sense that other applications use that wrapped utility. Though there may be a more professional way to express this. I was removed the debtags developers list, presumably because of being too busy to contribute. I apologize and would not mind too be added back in as smoe-guest. If allowed I volunteer to add (and describe) the in the following undisputed terms to svn this week. Best regards Steffen
Attachment:
pgpE7YZhPTPZ9.pgp
Description: PGP signature