DataONE:meeting notes:17 June 2010 chat

From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search

9:01 AM Heather: You've been invited to this chat room!

 Hi Sarah and Nic.
Nicholas: Hello
Sarah: good morning
Heather: Valerie will be joining in a sec I'm guessing

9:02 AM Nic, did you have a chance to see the chat log from yesterday?

 Any questions out of that?
Nicholas: I did
Valerie has joined

9:03 AM Heather: and btw the agenda for today, very similar to what we didn't get to yesterday:

Nicholas: I think there was a question for me about the content in treebase? yes?
Nicholas: From what I know, is that its mostly data matrices

9:04 AM Valerie: ah

Nicholas: "It includes phylogenetic trees and data matrices, together with information about the relevant publication, taxa, morphological and sequence-based characters, and published analyses."
Heather: I just had an interesting conversation in the hall of the Biodiversity Centre at UBC
Sarah: yep that's what i noticed when i downloaded some data
Heather: supposedly there is a thing called "super trees" which is people building big trees out of other trees
Sarah: a lot of it is phylo figures from the paper itself
Heather: other trees = potentially things in TreeBASE
Sarah: i.e. actual intext figures
 plus the data matriz

9:05 AM thanks for that confirmation though

Heather: so might see reuse in that context. The prof I was talking to didn't say if it was on the order of 5 trees or 200 trees... obviously citation patterns would be different.
 Anyway, thought it was interesting.
 hmmmm, not seeing Valerie
Valerie: I'm here

9:06 AM Heather: oh, hi Valerie! Sorry about that

Valerie: it's cool
Heather: great. ok, so agenda is here:
 anythign to add?

9:07 AM ok, let's start then.

 want to finalize friday blog plans here, since you are all together?
Nicholas: sure.. did we want to do some kind of poll ?
Valerie: I like that Idea

9:08 AM Sarah: i like it (just sent an email in response before this chat)

Heather: make it easy to vote, easy to see results
Valerie: I was about to send a message saying it's a great way to make sure we have something to comment on the following friday

9:09 AM Heather: yup. so want to hash out the question here or on email?

Valerie: I don't see why we couldn't do it here
 er, discuss here
Heather: somebody going to look into what poll-hosting tech you'll use? there is a popular plug in for wordpress, probably?
Nicholas: I'm on it
Heather: good. begin :)

9:10 AM you're on the tech, nic? great.

Sarah: i'm fine with the question heather already proposed

9:11 AM Heather: here it is, for ref:

 "As a researcher, what prevents you from citing data according to best practices?"

- I don't reuse data - I don't know what the best practices are for citing data - I do cite data according to best practices. Definitely. - I do cite data according to best practices. I think. - There are contradictory best practices. - It takes too long - I tried but my publisher wouldn't let me - Other with easy commenting on the blog post.

Valerie: it's a good initial question
 since Sarah's post was about this

9:12 AM Heather: nic? Or other answer possibilities?

Nicholas: no I think this is good,,, I was just browsing for poll plug ins

9:13 AM I think it gets to the point of what we are doing

Heather: ok, cool. One idea is to create an OWW page for brainstorming future poll ideas....
 that way people can add as they come up with them, might get some mentor feedback, etc
Sarah: yeah. i keep a personal log of the questions i have
 some philosophical, some about my research, some about "what if.."

9:14 AM so, that might be good to do as a group

 also helps generate ideas for analysis and write up
Heather: yup! maybe even link to the OWW page from the initial poll page, so that people who visit the poll who are interested can throw in ideas....
 good idea, Sarah.
Valerie: cool
Nicholas: ditto Sarah, I need to get better at putting these into my oww space though

9:15 AM Sarah: yeah, i have some on scrap paper or email i still need to txfr, but i'm trying

Heather: Nic, any barriers to doing that other than time? ie do you have any questions about it or things we can help with?

9:16 AM Nicholas: no no, I think it's just getting into the habit of keeping a central place for my notes

 and getting it into my workflow
Heather: yup, definitely forming new habits. me too.

9:17 AM ok, knoxville.

 everybody got that the plan is to meet in Knoxville TN on July 7 and 8th? that works for everyone?
Valerie: yes
Nicholas: yes
Sarah: yes
Heather: good! then write it on calendars and we'll figure out details soon

9:18 AM Valerie: ok, excellent

Nicholas: great
Heather: for now, just wanted to say that we will aim to have explicit goals for the meeting
 and that will probably mean that to get the most out of it, we'll all have to do some prep
 I don't know what kind of prep yet :) it depends on the goals, which I also don't know yet ;)

9:19 AM Valerie: ok

Heather: but I'm guessing it might be something like draft posters or presentations, and also
 perhaps things beyond that, like some draft analysis
 or paper outlines, or something like that

9:20 AM Sarah: like a mini conference meeting?

Heather: it probably will include some detailed work, and to prep for that we'll probably want to have gotten our feet dirty with statts
 Yeah, Sarah, I actually have no idea yet.
 I'm mostly just giving you all a heads up to say that

9:21 AM you might want to mentally consider the week before the meeting to be "meeting prep" time, to a large degree

 the meeting prep will (hopefully) be right in line with work you'd be doing on your projects anyway....
 it just has a due date of July 7th.
 that make sense?
Valerie: we also have a due date on the 30th, right?

9:22 AM Heather: right, for your project milestones.

 In the next week or two we'll figure out what we want to get out of the knoxville meeting, and then
 figure out how best to present the project milestone work, the open questions, etc....

9:23 AM Nicholas: I like the idea of a mini conference- at least in terms of how we consider preparing 9:24 AM Heather: I could ask you know what you think you want to get out of the Knoxville meeting, but I think we'll hold off on a big discussion about that till next week, once your feet are more deeply into your projects

 good to know, Nic
 other thoughts or questions about that?
Sarah: and, the knoxville meeting might be a good time to "report" on our june 30 milestones, rather than being redundant
Heather: yes
Valerie: I definitely agree

9:25 AM Heather: fyi, Todd and I will both be in Portland OR at the end of june, for the Evolution and ievobio conferences 9:26 AM so at least two people on the team won't be remote from each other for a week or so lol

Valerie: ah, I hope you enjoy Portland (I used to live there)

9:27 AM Heather: I definitely will! I've visited, and have friends there. great town. Thanks, Valerie.

 ok, next....
 Just wanted to put a plug in for a research approach that many people swear by....
 writing your abstracts before you've finished the work.

9:28 AM Often very instructive about where to focus your research. Anyone have experience doing that?

Valerie: I agree (not so much from experience in science writing, but in general)
Sarah: i've used that as a good trick for conferences where i haven't collected all my data yet.

9:29 AM but i have yet to try it for manuscripts...i usually save the abstract for last

Heather: yes. It is probably a case of writing it first, throwing that version away when you have your data, and then writing it again last,,,,,

9:30 AM Nicholas: I think I have a similar approach,, not in the form of an abstract, but a mock-up of what I expect to gather and how I can discuss this clearly

Heather: cool.
 ok, well consider this a nudge to give it a try when you need a break from data collection someday soon.
 and when you do, circulate it around to us for visibility, feedback.

9:31 AM (that sort of thing makes me want us to have a box somewhere saying "collaborators, look at these pages" or something. hrm)

Valerie: definitely (since this is my first time doing this)
Heather: ok.

9:32 AM stats.

 who has experience running stats? who doesn't? what software packages have you used?
 has anyone used SAS or SPSS or R?
Sarah: R
 primer (ecological, multivariate....expensive)
Nicholas: I do not

9:33 AM Sarah: excel packages (extensions?)

Valerie: I have not had experience with any of them.
Sarah: access (custom)
 R's good b/c open access
Heather: so we've got a range of experience. That'll work.
Sarah: and almost always has a package written for the thing you want to do

9:34 AM Heather: yup... so I'm thinking we standarize on R for this project. Makes sense, you think, Sarah?

 it has a bit of a steep learning curve, but we'll help you up it Nic and Valerie
Sarah: yeah
 the programming isn't too bad
Valerie: excellent, thanks
Sarah: i have a good tutorial
 that i can dig up
 from a past class
Heather: it makes stat analysis very transparent and easy to reuse and redo

9:35 AM Sarah: yeah. we could easily post our coding

 and input files
Heather: and will be a great tool for you in your future life
Sarah: plus, it's easy to download
Nicholas: I need more experience so I'm up for it
Sarah: packages and the software itself
Heather: that would be great, sarah. I'll try to post a few helpful intros too. There are oodles on the web.
Sarah: i'm not an expert, but I like learning new things in it
Heather: fyi, googling for "R" is problamatic but "R-project" is useful
Sarah: or cran r
Valerie: cool, good to know

9:36 AM I'm still on Windows XP

 is that an issue?
Sarah: nope
Heather: or there is a specific R google engine, I'll post a link
 nope, R is on everything
Sarah: it's basic code, not platform dependent
Valerie: ah
Heather: Nic, what OS are you on, fmi?
 Sarah, you are on a Windows machine?
Nicholas: mac
 os x
Sarah: windows
Nicholas: I have access to a pc though
Sarah: running windows 7
 but used to run on xp
 i think r works for mac too

9:37 AM Heather: ok. Good. installation a bit different obviously but no problem

Nicholas: xp on my pc
Sarah: though, i know some people in my class ran into weird quirks
Heather: yup it does. I'm on a mac, osx
 great. then if/when you need a break from data collection, you can install R and look around a bit.
 we'lll post some links.

9:38 AM Nicholas: excellent

Heather: running stats in R also means that we can cheat forward about planning and coding statistical analsis before all of the data is in
 since you write a script, you can do it and test it on pilot data or dummy data.... then rerun it once all your real data is in. handy for overlapping projects like ours, I think

9:39 AM Sarah: and for iterative analyses

Heather: anyway, we won't dive full into R just yet because important to focus on data collection right now I think, just wanted to give you some info on future
Sarah: i'll send along the tutorial
Valerie: ok, thanks
Heather: great
Nicholas: thanks
Heather: related question.

9:40 AM has anyone used source control before? subversion, cvs, git? or know what I'm talking about? :)

Sarah: not a clue
Valerie: have no idea
Heather: no problem.

9:41 AM Nicholas: nope

Heather: so source control is a way that programmers keep track of all of the versions of their computer source code
Valerie: is it like version control?
Heather: themselves, as they change things, and between coworkers when there are many people working on the same project
 yes, exactly.
 it is version control for computer source code

9:42 AM anyway, I don't know for sure that we will go there... but as we develop R scripts, it is a "best practice" to keep them under version control

 plus it would help us!

9:43 AM Valerie: will there be file naming conventions?

Heather: so we'll see how it goes, but I'd like to see if we can keep track of our scripts using git and github
 valerie, maybe, but source control makes naming conventions a bit less important.
 version information is stored in metadata around the files.

9:44 AM we could post the R scripts directly in our OWW pages, but git (for example) is better designed for this kind of thing, kind of like google spreadsheets are better designed for sharing tabular data 9:45 AM ok, well, enough on that for now, I'll look to see if there is a really simple way we can work this into our R workflow.

 Any questions about all of that?
Sarah: nope. it's over my head, but i'll figure it out when we get there

9:46 AM Heather: I'm guessing we'll come back to thinking about stats, at least as methods, in the next week or three.

Valerie: I'm sure I'll have questions along the way
Nicholas: same here -- I'm going to need this over the next year so I'd appreciate digging into this summer
Heather: great!
 ok. so the only other thing on my list to cover is data coordination.

9:47 AM Sarah: did you see my additions to that?

 i linked up the ss i shared
 so we can talk about them
Heather: I didn't Sarah, sorry.
Valerie: I have the ss open
Sarah: maybe just refresh the agenda page
Heather: got it

9:48 AM Valerie: I added the fields for Journal ISSN, year and volume to my ss 9:49 AM Sarah: i'm wondering if you can maybe use this exact ss (just your own copy)....that would make our field standardization easier even if you don't use all the fields

 and by standardization, i also mean eventual combination
Valerie: ok
Sarah: i dunno, just a thought
 i don't want you to have to conform to my system per say
 that's why i put it on the doc so we can both modify it

9:50 AM and i indicated what fields match with your existing fields

Valerie: I'm not sure how I would switch around the information, but I could do that
Sarah: i have to reanalyze some of my articles to make mine fit too, i expected that would happen in these early stages
Heather: Valerie, if you experimented with using your own copy of this exact SS and then figured out whether there were things about it that woudl need to change a bit to work for you....

9:51 AM could definitely make data combination easy later.

Valerie: ok
 the one labeled DataONECitationsMETADATA?
Sarah: that's for everyone
Valerie: or the second one?
Sarah: just to cover basic fields
 not necessarily where we keep data
 just to make sure everyone is getting the fields that will be necessary to link our data in the future

9:52 AM so, the SharedFields sheet has all the fields we need for articles from the Metadata ss

Heather: so Valerie, it would be your own copy of the 2nd sheet, the SharedFields sheet
Valerie: oh, ok

9:53 AM got it

Sarah: nic, have you looked at the Metadata sheet?
Heather: (and you could obviously delete the columns that weren't relevant to your extraction, if they got in the way)
Sarah: it looks like most of what you are collecting is on par already
Nicholas: Im looking now
Sarah: but we do need to work out what you are collecting about citation policies
Heather: Valerie, have a look and see what you think and maybe chat with Sarah about it later today so you guys can tweek the relevant columns to work for both of you?
Nicholas: issue volume and funder are out of scope... I think I'm covering everything else though

9:54 AM Sarah: will you be covering funder eventually?

 i thought that was under you
Nicholas: it is
Sarah: but it's not super impt
 i can just classify as public or private
 for each article that is
Nicholas: but collecting the funding of a journal is not applicable
 or an article I mean

9:55 AM Sarah: what do you mean?

 I collect the funding info for each article
Nicholas: right and I collect the metadata for the funder
 and the policy for the funder
Sarah: ok
 but you haven't quite delved into that, right?
 from what i saw on your ss

9:56 AM Nicholas: no not at all

 I did an initial sample to see if there would be enough there, and it seemed like there would be so I've kept it in my scope
 today I'm hoping to finish most of the ecology journals

9:57 AM and if I find good policy I'll send you the names

Heather: whooosh you go, Nic!
Nicholas: yup
Sarah: ok, meaning citation policy?
 or funding?
Nicholas: yeah
Sarah: ok. valerie (and I for that matter) is interested in rating an article according to if it meets the journal or depositories policy

9:58 AM so we need to figure out how to code the policy to match

 can you send me the text of a good policy so i can look over it too?
Nicholas: yes
Sarah: that way we can figure out how our extraction fields can match with it to yield something meaningful

9:59 AM do the depositories have citation policies as well?

Valerie: some seem to
Sarah: the ones i've seen mention accession at least

10:00 AM is nic or valerie collecting/coding those?

 meaning the citation policies of depositories
Nicholas: sharing policies are definitely present so far... but citation directions ( i.e cite this way) are very rare, in fact I think there is only one I've found so far that even mentions how one should cite data

10:01 AM Valerie: I started something awhile back, but I think Nic's doing it (unless I'm wrong)

Heather: There might be an advantage to holding off coding for a bit, until we have more raw data to understand the alternatives
Sarah: can you send me a sharing policy too? i'm wondering what we can collect at the article level about that besides yn
Heather: so collect the data now, but don't attempt to make it formally coded into categories yet. I'm not sure we know 100% what would be good categories.

10:02 AM Valerie: sure

Sarah: yeah, that's why i keep full text of any relevant excerpt
Sarah: but somethings i code now b/c it's easier while i'm fresh from the article
Nicholas: this is cladistics sharing policy
Sarah: thanks
Nicholas: under subject matter

10:03 AM Sarah: thanks

Sarah: this is mostly concerned with the formats of the shared data files

10:04 AM should we record that from the articles?

Nicholas: in the metadata I am collecting, I am noting if formats are required
Sarah: this seems like it's mostly for data sharing within the journal (i.e. internal)

10:05 AM Nicholas: These data will be made available to the referees but not to the community at large until such time as the paper is accepted.

Sarah: it seems a little silly for me to dig up data format info from each article, since I assume it's a requirement for even getting it posted

10:06 AM i.e. at cladistics, if you submit a .png file, they'll ask you for a .jpg or .gif instead

 the editor should have to take care of that technicality
 b/c it probably has to do more with storage space
Nicholas: I don't think you should collect that info
Sarah: not data quality
Heather: yeah, I think data format info can be outside our scope
Nicholas: Im just noting it when I come across it

10:07 AM Sarah: what would be more interesting is if you came across a data metadata part of the policy, i.e. requiring detailed documentation of how to use the data file

 but again, probably outside of the scope

10:08 AM Nicholas: well so far, that's not present in journal policy

Sarah: yeah, understandable
 is this the section of the BMC policy you wanted me to see:
 The Accession Numbers of any nucleic acid sequences, protein sequences or atomic coordinates cited in the manuscript should be provided, in square brackets and include the corresponding database name; for example, [EMBL:AB026295, EMBL:AC137000, DDBJ:AE000812, GenBank:U49845, PDB:1BFM, Swiss-Prot:Q96KQ7, PIR:S66116].

The databases for which we can provide direct links are: EMBL Nucleotide Sequence Database (EMBL), DNA Data Bank of Japan (DDBJ ), GenBank at the NCBI (GenBank), Protein Data Bank (PDB), Protein Information Resource (PIR) and the Swiss-Prot Protein Database (Swiss-Prot).

 That's awesome (for our purposes)

10:09 AM that's what I was hoping we'd have for citation policies. unfortunately i don't have bmc on my journal list (but could if we want to focus on journals that have actual citation policies)

Nicholas: yes

10:10 AM thus far, its the best one

Sarah: oh, and it keeps going on and on
 do my journals have comparable ones (or even any)
 am nat
 molecular ecology
 i'm seeing major inconsistencies in molec ecology

10:11 AM Nicholas:

 under DATA
Sarah: thanks
 is this recorded in your spreadsheet?

10:12 AM sorry, i haven't looked over it super throughly

Nicholas: yes
 line 3
Sarah: thanks
 i won't pester you anymore about that then.
Nicholas: I need to put the full text in, since I did that journal I've revised my fields

10:13 AM Sarah: ok. and let me know if you find any other really good journals like bmc evo bio so i consider sampling at least a few of those articles

Nicholas: I will
Sarah: great
 heather, what else did you want to discuss about data coordination?

10:14 AM Heather: one other thing

 wanted to explicitly talk about article metadata, since it might help Valerie and Sarah, and might be something Nic could do
 specifically, Nic, I was thinking that there are some article metadata fields in ISI Web of Science or Scopus or similar

10:15 AM that would list all authors, corresponding author address, etc

 things that Valerie and Sarah could extract, but might be more easily and cleanly pulled from other sources
 Easiest for Sarah's stuff, because it woudl just be issues a, b, c of journals x and y (or something)

10:16 AM Sarah: i'm finding it easiest just to pull from the article pdf

Heather: Harder for Valerie's because the spread of articles is wider. Thus might be more pain than it is worth to try for systematic crossreferencing.
Sarah: but their are a few things on isi that i would like
 like funding source
Valerie: same here. although I haven't been pulling the author address
 should I do that?
Sarah: but my citation software isn't pulling it out
Heather: No.
Valerie: (also, sometimes I used the "et al." should I capture all author names?)
Sarah: oh, i say yes to author address

10:17 AM Heather: So I think it might behoove us to have someone look into extracting the article metadata from a bibliographic source like ISI or Scopus

Sarah: for nationality and discipline of heather's biomed study
Heather: so Sarah I think yes we want it, bu tI think mostly no on Valerie extracting it
 because ideally we want to pull it systematically from somewhere
Sarah: ok...having it auto extract from isi then
Heather: anyway, Nic, would you look into it?

10:18 AM Nicholas: yes

Sarah: i'll look into it to b/c i need to figure out a method for my random sample like we discussed previously and will be experimenting in isi
Heather: great. thanks. Report back on what fields you can pull from which sources, how easy it is to export the data, your recommended approach

10:19 AM Nicholas: yes, sarah if you feel like it's something I can gather then pass it on 10:20 AM Heather: nic, I think you should do it too if you can... it is kind of parallel to other things you are doing, article metadata as opposed to journal metadata etc

Sarah: nic...are you familiar with scopus? or have access? i don't
Nicholas: I have access
Sarah: ok. i might, but i don't think so
 also, per heather's comment
Heather: Nic I think your information science background would be great here :)

10:21 AM Sarah: i think nic could extract it and we link to it through doi, but also valerie and i might need it for populating our fields

Heather: Valerie, you might have ideas and direction suggestions too? If so, chime in
Sarah: so it might be easier for us to collect once we figure out what can be collected
Valerie: not really, I'm still just collecting data so far
 I have found a couple of interesting things
Heather: Valerie, to your "et al" above.... I think leave it at et al, and I hope we can capture list of full authors (or at least count of athors) from ISI or Scopus or something

10:22 AM Valerie: ok

 admittedly I don't have Scopus access
 but I have been using ISI a lot
Heather: Sarah, yes on "once we know what can be extracted"
 good stuff, valerie.

10:23 AM cool. So Nic if you can have some info on that in the next day or two, I think it will help finalize a few data extraction fields for Sarah and Valerie.

Valerie: should I just stick to one depository for depth purposes?
 I sort of started on Pangaea
Heather: Yes, great, do start on others
Valerie: ok
Heather: I think it will help you figure out different alternatives.
Nicholas: I'm on it

10:24 AM Heather: I think starting with one and looking at it from different directions, then moving on to another, then maybe a third will help you finalize a set of search methods that you can then apply to all of them

Valerie: it's interesting to see the differences in how things are cited. it seems more likely that people cite the article originally tied to the data as opposed to the data itself
Sarah: agreed
Valerie: ok, that makes sense
Sarah: that's coded in the new ss
Heather: yes, definitely true for some datatypes.

10:25 AM Sarah: under "how cited" i believe 10:26 AM nic (as and aside) - i definitely don't have scopus. i'll look at isi today, but you should probably look too b/c you probably know more about extraction...we can compare fields later

Heather: cool. So Valerie, I'm thinking that in a few days? a week? I'm not sure... you have a list of five (or 3 or 10) search strings/methods you finalize on.
 is that consistent with what you were thinking?
Valerie: sure
Heather: they will not be perfect obviously and will still need manual review to separate
Valerie: that sounds right since some search strings don't work as well when looking for citations of some repositories
Heather: instances of shared data from instances of reuse... and they won't find all instances of reuse....

10:27 AM but comparing whhat they do find will be informative across databases and journals, I think. make sense?

Sarah: and, you can have my annotated articles for test search...just remind me when you need them
 i.e. i label them all as dataSharing or dataReuse
Valerie: ok, thanks
Sarah: and what depository
 i had trouble sending it the other day, but i'm sure we could figure it out
Valerie: I'll upload my citations to connotea for your reference once I get more solid search hits
Heather: Valerie, your project definitely has an upfront stage of exploration in a way that the other projects don't!
Valerie: I've been searching for TreeBASE and Pangaea

10:28 AM if there's one more you're seeing a lot, I could search that too to make sure we have enough overlap

Heather: I'd add DAAC to your shorrt list too
 esp since there is some of the preliminary DOI reuse data from Bruce
Valerie: oh yeah, the spreadsheet they sent us

10:29 AM I posted a link to that on my lab notebook page

Heather: you have that presentation and the related articles from Bob?
 so searching for those using DOIs might be very informative, for example.
 One other one, in case you wanted a fourth, would be Genbank
Sarah: yeah
Heather: just because it is so huge and well established, it will make for an interesting comparison
Sarah: i see genbank the most

10:30 AM i think b/c scientists are used to it

Valerie: ok, so DAAC, then Genbank after Pangaea (time permitting)
Heather: yup.
Valerie: ok

10:31 AM Heather: great.

 anything else people want to talk abut today?
Sarah: nope.
Valerie: I'm good for now
Heather: Valerie and Sarah I'm guessing you guys will pow-wow later today on tweaking fields so they work for both of you
Valerie: yeah
Heather: Nic, we'll here from you in the next few days about article metadata

10:32 AM Nicholas: yes

Sarah: oh wait...heather, can i just verify that you got my "plan of action" email to the mentors....i haven't got any feedback yet.
Heather: I'll post a blog
 yes, I did Sarah! Nice details
Nicholas: I think I can extract a lot of citation info from scopus
Heather: I wont' be too surprised if you don't hear anything
Sarah: i've got article metadata from isi...i'll send to nic right now
 and all i guess
Nicholas: thanks
Heather: so in that case.... proceed.
Sarah: ok.

10:33 AM i'm sticking with sysbio right now...seems like the safest in terms of good citation policy, interest, etc

 but then i'll move onto the others unless i hear otherwise
Heather: sounds good sarah.
 Sysbio is weird because it has been more data sharing heavy than the rest
 but that makes it important to include

10:34 AM Sarah: but good in that regard then

Heather: yes
Sarah: yeah. okay
 sorry to prolong the chat
Heather: ok!
 I'll be around... feel free to ping me for a chat whenever
Valerie: neat.
 will d
Heather: I'll be keeping tabs on the OWW stuff

10:35 AM otherwise shall we just plan to reconnect on Monday?

Sarah: or wed?
Valerie: sounds good for either
Sarah: what will our regular meeting time(s) be?
Heather: Yup, so could just be Tuesday for the whole-group telecon, unless you see value in something scheduled before then

10:36 AM I think there might be value in a meeting on Monday

 since we are still getting data collection stuff finalized
Nicholas: I agree
Sarah: sure
Valerie: ok

10:37 AM Heather: Monday 9am pacific, again? Valerie, your poor lunchtime.

Valerie: eh, it's fine
 I eat at my desk if I'm not at the library anyway

10:38 AM and I tend to eat a later lunch/dinner

Heather: ok, good.
 don't wait on spontaneous chats though
 but will reconnect for sure on Monday at 9am pacific.

10:39 AM Valerie: ok, excellent. I'll send any questions I have prior to that

Heather: wishing you many productive data extraction vibes until then :)
Valerie: thanks

10:40 AM Heather: bye!

Nicholas: bye
Heather has left
Valerie: bye
Valerie has left
 Nicholas has left