Before I send a bug report to change DebTags please do some sanity check
Hi Enrico and who else might be interested in DebTags,
thanks a lot for your continuous effort about DebTags. It is really
appreciated and comes perfectly right in time since our current Debian
Med sprint finally was dedicated to tagging and categorising and finding
some common denominator with the bioinformatics comunity represented
here by Elixir who intends to create a sensible classification of
biotools[1].
While I provided them with a rich data set out of UDD about ready
packaged tools my Debian Med folks now realised what I kept on telling
them since years: We need to be way more focussed on proper DebTags
starting by finding proper DebTags first and than start doing the work.
:-)
As some outcome of our brainstorming here I created a new branch edam in
Git[2] and started editing the facets and tags how *I* think it could be
useful. I would really like to hear your opinion what you might think
about my changes which are explained in the file edam-changes.txt. I
also added the file edam-concepts.txt by Jon Ison which is a more
extensive set of potential tags which is probably not useful for the
moment but might add ideas for future tags.
If you consider my approach useful in principle I would start a
discussion on the Debian Med mailing list about the practical details.
If you have general criticism about my approach please tell me in
advance and give hints how I could increase the procedure to review the
DebTags scheme for the biological fields of Debian Med.
Kind regards and thanks again for your work
Andreas.
[1] https://bio.tools/
[2] http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debtags/vocabulary.git
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: