BBF RFC 18
Jump to navigationJump to search
- Eric's discussion is important. I like all the symbols accept the "T" for termination sites. I prefer the hexagon. His point of selecting symbols that are easy to draw is valid and will definitely be incorporated into BOGL. - Cesar
- My labmate Jerome Bonnet likes the "T" symbol and has begun using it for whiteboard discussions. I will include it in the next iterations of the BOGL symbols. - Cesar
- In general I like what has been proposed in RFC 18. In particular I like the idea of illustrating both standard tiles (for computer software, documents, etc) as well as a hand drawn guideline (for meetings, whiteboards, etc). Personally I am more interested what the shapes should be as opposed to collections of their physical realizations (e.g. jpeg, svg files). However this may be useful as well. I can commit to using whatever symbols are decided upon this summer for the new Clotho visualization environment I am creating. It would be good to get this to the UW folks to use with Tinkercell as well which has a very icon based design environment.
Something else to think about is talking about issues like:
- Input and output composition rules for icons (i.e. how to hook these together)
- The convention for interpreting a diagram made from these parts (e.g. left to right)
- Standard orientation for the icons (e.g. proper rotation an icon)
- Add an icon to encapsulate more than one icon (e.g. a black box)
Just some thoughts....
-Douglas Densmore, UC Berkeley - http://biocad-server.eecs.berkeley.edu/wiki
- Doug, I also plan to use the next iteration of the BOGL symbols in the BioBrick Studio application that I'm developing. I will iterate through the BOGL symbols this week and submit a document for RFC 16 next week. - Cesar