OpenWetWare:Ideas

Note to sign your name+date in a reply type ~~~~

Categories

I think we could use the Categories feature of the wiki more effectively. Having a list called Protocols and a category called Protocols seems redundant. What about using Categories to connect group pages across lists? For instance, a "Running systems in a μreactor" category could include links to ordering microfluidics (under Protocols), the Scope (under Equipment), media (under Materials) and other relevant pages. This approach would essentially use Lists and Categories as two separate "dimensions" along which pages can be grouped. --Reshma 21:13, 25 May 2005 (EDT)

• Yeah that's good -- I like the idea of grouping things from multiple lists in relevant ways, the question is when do categories become more useful then just creating a "Running systems in a μreactor" page and then linking to everything like that? For instance take the media (or the scope), how many categories could it end up being in? running a μreactor, running a macro chemostat, growing a batch culture, etc. In that case I think having seperate "group pages" or something that each individually pointed to the media might be better. Jasonk 00:55, 26 May 2005 (EDT)
• I think the categories might pay off better if we had a lot of protocols that were distributed accross different heirarchical list schemes. For instance if I started adding new protocols to my user page directly, in some sort of heirarchy that was relevant to me, i.e. "frequently used protocols" vs. "infrequently used protocols" or something, then I could just slap a category tag at the end and know that I had placed it into an appropriate spot in the aggregate general protocol area. Also, could imagine if you aggregated a few lab wikis together that had pre-defined heirarchies, the categories could serve to create a common protocol space without everyone having to conform to the same list scheme. So it might be that they are more useful down the line (or not), but it certainly doesn't hurt to give any system a try and see if it proves useful (can always change it easily). Jasonk 00:55, 26 May 2005 (EDT)

I guess i'd like to think about what other categories would be useful.

Lab Notebook

Not planning on throwing my lab notebook online just yet, but if you were to consider using the wiki for such a thing you might want to have some sort of encrypted date/user signature. This would potentially give the more paranoid among us more ammunition in their attempt at defaming the person who "scooped" them in this guerilla war we call academics. (sarcasm tags would also be nice) Jasonk 18:27, 23 May 2005 (EDT)

Some relevant links:(thanks ilya)

• Open Source Electronic Lab Notebook Software

OSELN

• Also, the pharmaceutical industry has some pretty serious electronic signature rules, which are patent-safe. Expensive to implement and likely overkill for academia but:

Rule21 CFR Part11]

Suggested new name: knendipedia

• I think knendipedia might be a more appropriate name for this wiki :). (I liked knendipedia better than enightipedia). What do you think? -Reshma 10:07, 11 May 2005 (EDT)
• Maybe we should just go with something like SynthBioWiki or something, would make it easier to add more friends down the line, not sure the knendipedia approach scales, shetkoscanknendipedia :) Jasonk 18:26, 23 May 2005 (EDT)
• How about SBpedia - pronounced speedia --BC 19:33, 23 May 2005 (EDT)
  • My one problem with the above two suggestions is that not everyone does 'synthetic biology' ie me, francios, jeff, ty, heather... --Sri Kosuri 23:29, 25 May 2005 (EDT)
    • good point, then how about some generic bio term, like geneipedia, or some such nonsense.Jasonk 00:53, 26 May 2005 (EDT)

User page / posting personal ideas

It would be nice to post pages which are non-editable for things like your personal opinion on something scientific. I.e. the type of stuff that might be found on your user page. This also becomes more important if we open the wiki to be world-writable.

We could accomplish this by making all users admistrators since admins have ability to "protect" pages and lock them from editing. This would work so long as members were all trusted, but if we decide to expand member base we might like to have a way of doing it without giving everyone admin access.

Anyone know of how to do it without giving admin access?

Presentations/posters/papers

One thing that struck me as potentially useful would be a place to archive presentations and posters. Might be useful to be able to look over others presentations to see how they presented things etc. Similarly, it might be nice to also be able to post works in progress like papers or various writeups etc. Of course, I can imagine several levels of release like private (probably wouldn't post), release to the Knight/Endy lab (wiki?) and release to the world (http://www.syntheticbiology.org?).

• Does the wiki have a good mechanism for posting documents? A quick look suggested to me that you could only upload pictures.
  
  • i think you can only do pictures, best bet for docs seems to be store elsewhere and link - i like the idea of having a place on model where we can dump all wiki docs/ppts/etc in a centralized place.Jasonk 14:40, 28 Apr 2005 (EDT)
  • Can now post whatever type of file you like Jasonk 18:30, 23 May 2005 (EDT)
• Can sections of the wiki be made off limits to those without user accounts. ie non-readable?
  • Not very easily. --Skosuri 14:36, 28 Apr 2005 (EDT)
  • they can be made non-writable, though. see idea above Jasonk 14:46, 28 Apr 2005 (EDT)
• Or alternatively people can post documents in their own public directories. Use MIT's certificate system to control who access the directories and then just put an external link on the wiki. This gives maximum control over access to the author but does not centralize documents as much. This also may be problematic as people graduate or leave the lab.
  • This is a good idea for now. In the future, we could create a section on model to have a username and login for private files. --Skosuri 14:36, 28 Apr 2005 (EDT)
• Any better ideas?

Collaborators

Forgot to mention in lab meeting, but will be giving the Knight lab write access to the pages, talked with reshma and austin and they thought it made more sense to just have one wiki we could share rather than cross referencing seperate wikis. (might need a new name then).

Also, we could consider starting Collaborative Projects pages, for things such as the Standard BB strain, etc.

Ideas from Lab Meeting 4/27

Openness of the wiki

Options for public access:

1. World-writable and readable
2. World-readable only
3. World-no access
4. Hybrid
   • World can write to discussion but not to main articles.

We decided that we should go with option 2 for the time being at least until the wiki stabilizes and then consider making the wiki world-writable.