Re: Fixed all upstream metadata in Debian Med (Was: RRID update on salsa on packages starting with A+B)
On 04/12/2018 05:10 PM, Steffen Möller wrote:
> This was still open on my desk - sorry for the late reply.
>
> On 4/10/18 6:09 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:25:52PM +0200, Steffen Möller wrote:
>>>
>>> An immediate concern of mine is that we have no visibility of our
>>> task page with Google. A strategic mistake apparently was
>>> to have the actuall RRID hidden in the URL rather than having printed
>>> it flat out in the task description. I thought this was enough to
>>> have the page found while not dominating e.g. the package's description
>>> in the tracker.
>> Can you please give an example? I do not understand what you prefer
>> over what we just have.
>
> Instead of <a href="identifier.org/..RRID:SCR_...">SciCrunch</a> it
> could be <a href="the same">RRID:SCR_..</a>.
>
may be interesting to set:
<a href="the same"><cite>RRID:SCR_..</cite></a>
cite is a metadata HTML standard that may be supported/analysed by
google and co (https://developer.mozilla.org/fr/docs/Web/HTML/Element/cite)
> Location-wise maybe with the green area would be nicer. I am not sure
> if the problem google has with our page is not also of some other
> nature, though. The current page header of that page is lacking a
> description. Not being an expert in search-engine optimisation, I just
> iterated through
> https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/79812?hl=en and did not
> find much else to add, really. Suggestions:
>
> <meta name="description" content="List of packages in the Debian Linux
> distribution curated by the ${preprety:blend or whatever} community.
> Here shown the subset of packages ${task description}." />
>
> Maybe you (or some SEO pro on this list) find some more bits
>
>> As a totally unrelated note: I have the feeling that seeking for Debian
>> relevant things (for instance in our mailing lists) became not as
>> successful as it was some years ago. I'm more and more falling back to
>> seeking in my private mail archive using notmuch.
>
> Well, all this RRID stuff to me is a prelude to help automating
> workflow environments. If we are not biological, then there is not too
> much to discuss, we just need someone to do the work ;)
>
>>> While googling around I was pointed to this list of what the authors
>>> considered common software in bioinformatics at
>>> ftp://penguin.genomics.cn/pub/10.5524/RRID/RRIDlist.pdf
>> Interesting list. Do you have some suggestion what to do with it?
>
> Nothing. It just kind of helps to assess where we are. We have a good
> coverage of that list. Not perfect, but good, i.e. good enough to come
> up with a series of workflow descriptions.
>
> Steffen
>
>
>
--
Olivier Sallou
Univ Rennes, Inria, CNRS, IRISA
Irisa, Campus de Beaulieu
F-35042 RENNES - FRANCE
Tel: 02.99.84.71.95
gpg key id: 4096R/326D8438 (keyring.debian.org)
Key fingerprint = 5FB4 6F83 D3B9 5204 6335 D26D 78DC 68DB 326D 8438
Reply to: