DataONE:meeting notes:4 June 2010
9:02 AM Heather: Good morning, Sarah
Sarah: Hi. 9:03 AM I looked over the dryad and wetware site yesterday and have a list of questions, but thought you might have somethings to address first
Heather: Is now still a good time to chat?
Heather: cool. What do you think, shall we stick to text gchat, or try adding some voice or video? 9:04 AM Might make it easier to get to know each other a bit.
Are you somewhere with enough bandwidth to do that?
Sarah: sure. I don't have video, but my internet connection can handle it. 9:05 AM Heather: let's try a voice chat then. preference, gchat (I think it can do it??), skype, ?? 9:06 AM the software from yesterday?
Sarah: i need to add voice capabilities to my gchat real quick. i've been meaning to do it, just haven't got around to it
marratech is fine to, but my gmail keeps track of chat text which is nice. whatever you prefer
Heather: yeah, I hear you on the benefits of text. 9:07 AM how about this. let's do text this time, you add voice to gchat and in one of our next few chats we can do voice.
ok. yup, I do have a few framing sorts of things, then I'd love to answer your questions.
Sarah: sounds good 9:08 AM Heather: First, thought it might help if we give each other a brief intro on who we are and why we are here :)
So I'll tell you a bit about my relationship to dataone/dryad, and you tell me what you hope to get out of this project?
Or why you were interested in applying, or whatever. 9:09 AM I can go first.... 9:10 AM I graduated with my PhD from U of Pittsburgh last month. Dept of Biomedical Informatics, though my undergrad was in Electrical Engineering, so my bio background is spotty.
My research is in data sharing... who does, who doesn't share their raw research data 9:11 AM [btw don't feel a need for me to stop typing, jump in at any time....]
Todd found me, said he had this great postdoc spot studying data sharing with DataONE and Dryad, and poof I started this Tuesday. 9:12 AM ok, enough monologue. you?
Sarah: my undergrad and masters were both in biology, with an emphasis on stream ecology, entomology (insects), and GIS...i just finished my thesis focused on taxonomy and biogeography....I'm interested in this project because i ran into a lot of datasets that were undercited or hard to track down (especially because i was working on remote areas where little data is collected and published). also, i'm interested in the project because of my background in taxonomy...an area where the original authors are rarely properly cited.
Heather: great! 9:13 AM thanks, that info helps a lot.
Sarah: so, i would say i've become interested in the project for philosophical reasons and personal observations, and want to learn the actual methods of studying citation practices
Heather: perfecto. great. 9:14 AM Ok, so Todd Vision and I spoke yesterday morning about aims for this subproject.
(btw I think he regrets the slow ramp-up... he was out of town and then swamped... anyway, we're off and running now....) 9:15 AM and he suggested the two aims I (very briefly) mentioned yesterday.
Sarah: i saw the email you sent which was helpful becuase it put the things we discussed yesterday in question form which helped me think about them better
Heather: I think from there it us up to us. 9:16 AM And especially up to you, because I really want this to be a project that is interesting and relevant to you and that you feel you "own."
good, glad the email was helpful! writing it helped me too ;) Looks like in the last few minutes there was a very helpful followup from another mentor. Until then I was totally unclear as to what others were working on. 9:17 AM .... hrm, let me rephrase previous point. The goal is for this to be a project that you don't just feel you own, but that you actually do own. 9:18 AM so please don't hesitate to make it so, act like you own it, ask forgiveness rather than permission, etc.
though I'll be here for ideas, feedback, etc whenever you need it. 9:19 AM any questions or thoughts about those ideas?
they work for you?
Sarah: yes. i wasn't clear on how involved you were as mentor (i.e. if you established the daily "tasks" or provided overarching goals), so that helps 9:20 AM Heather: yes. well, the truth is that I'm not quite sure either. we're making it up as we go, I think. but the end goal is that you own it (and probably the initial steps are that we work together to define a project of mutural interest) 9:21 AM and other than that we figure out a day to day version that works for us
Sarah: so where should we start?
Heather: a bit more administrivia first, maybe.... 9:22 AM have you heard of the Evolution 2010 conference? or iEvoBio? are you anywhere near Portland, OR?
Sarah: I've heard the first and I read about the later yesterday 9:23 AM i'm in southern california right now, so relatively close but not driving distance.
Heather: gotcha. are you free June 29-30, the iEvoBio timeframe? 9:24 AM Sarah: as far as i know, let me check my calendar real quick
Heather: one thought I had this morning is that if a goal is for us to get together at a midpoitn time, that might be a great opportunity. I'm planning to be there, so we could get some face-to-face time. 9:25 AM Sarah: i am free, only thing is we have one car and the closest airport is a few hours away, so it my by a bit logistically challenging on my end, but doable
Heather: Also, it seems like a pretty informal conference (I've never been before), so might be an opportunity for a birds-of-feather discussion about others about progress 9:26 AM I hear you. I'm taking the train down because we are car-free.
Sarah: but, i'm interested in attending and meeting up with you
Heather: ok, well why don't you think about whether it is something you would want to do. 9:27 AM if so, we can pitch it to Todd
Sarah: yeah. it sounds like it would be good. 9:28 AM Heather: ok, so I'll pitch it then and we'll see where it goes. obviously feel free to suggest something else if you come up with a meet-up idea that would work better. 9:29 AM Sarah: no, i think it's good to combine a meetup with a conference meeting so we can network with the attendees as well
Heather: Agreed, could have lots of spinoff benefits....
ok, one more administrivia. 9:30 AM I've applied for an OpenWetWare account and it is taking more than a day for approval... so even though we don't actually know if we'll do anything there yet 9:31 AM Sarah: sure. i meant to do it yesterday, but caught up perusing people's lab sites that i forgot
Heather: I'd suggest you apply for an account soon to get the approval process going, so if we do decide to do it we don't have to wait :)
LOL no prob
Sarah: what do you envision us using the cite for beyond the dataone plone? 9:32 AM Heather: yeah good question.
Sarah: more rough stuff?
Sarah: like personal research notes, etc?
Heather: have you heard of "open notebook science" before?
Sarah: no. i haven't
Heather: most people haven't... it isn't very mainstream yet.
let me give you a few refs 9:33 AM I'll put them up on the Plone site too
The wikipedia article isn't a bad place to start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Notebook_Science 9:34 AM I'll dig up a few more refs too.
Basic idea is that you do your science in the open, on the internet, for everyone to see. The thought is that the transparency adds value in many ways.
It obviously has some advantages and disadvantages.... 9:35 AM and feels pretty risky for lots of people
Sarah: i agree...i'm a little behind in the technology but am a big advocate of google docs and similar resources that allow collaborative work
Heather: but I'm going to try to do most of my research openly
Sarah: i agree. i think that's the general problem dataone is grappling with...people want to hold onto their data and thoughts in hopes of using them "someday" for a publication 9:36 AM Heather: and if you are comfortable (or uncomfortable, but willing to give it a shot anyway ;) then this project might be a neat one to do extra-openly
super! 9:37 AM Sarah: i'm fine with it...we should also think about what kind of public access we want to allow/attract
Heather: yes, agreed. my default thought is to allow all kinds of public access 9:38 AM (that said, I do think there are some sorts of discussions that are not appropriate for public consumption, but would err on thinking most are unless there are obvious HR/confidentiality/etc issues)
Sarah: i agree, but do we also want to "attract" public comments/etc....openwetware is somewhat buried and obscure
Heather: good point.
I don't know. 9:39 AM let's keep thinking about it :)
Sarah: ok. just something to think about if we also want something more visible
Heather: yes, like a project webpage off a lab's website or something? 9:40 AM Sarah: I'm not exactly sure. blogs can be effective in terms of public comments and having links to dataone and openwetware wherever possible. 9:41 AM Heather: yes, good point. I'm very much in favour of blogging, and the blogging + linking idea sounds great.
I don't know if openwetware supports blogs within the "lab notebooks", or even if it does, if that is how we would want to do it.
would you like/be willing to blog your research notes for this project?
if so, fantastic! 9:42 AM Sarah: sure. maybe at the end of each day or week, i'll compose a blog post about my findings and questions.
Heather: hrm, replace "to blog your research notes" with "to blog whatever it is you want to"
awesome. 9:43 AM do you have a blog already that you'd want to use? or would you want to start a new one? whichever.
Sarah: i would start a new one..i'll look at options that could put us in good contact with the general science community
Heather: and whereever you'd want to host it is fine. 9:44 AM sounds good!
btw have you used friendfeed?
Heather: there is a useful group there that talks about open science a lot, and it can be a great place to get input on questions like "where should I start my general science blog" 9:45 AM http://friendfeed.com/the-life-scientists
definitely worth checking out
Sarah: great. thanks
Heather: will also be a great place to post links to the blog and open notebook... people there will be very interested and supportive. 9:46 AM ok, so I know you have an appt at 10am. want to pause and pick up with some more chatting after that?
Sarah: we can keep going for now. the person i'm meeting with is coming to where i am and they aren't always on time, so we can keeping going until then 9:47 AM Heather: ok!
ok. so. want to ask your questions first, or hear some more background on dryad or our research questions first, or ? 9:48 AM Sarah: research questions would be good, i expect that my questions might be answered as we discuss
Heather: ok. 9:49 AM So the research questions as relayed to me by Todd were via phone yesterday, so rather fuzzy, so I think we get to just run with them and make them our/your own.
He articulated these two separate approaches for looking at citation practices.
My guess is there is only enough time to do one of them well 9:50 AM And for what it is worth, the one that I can think through most directly is the start-with-Dryad-partner-journals aim. 9:51 AM That said, if focusing on reuse of datasets from specific repositories is more interesting or motivating for you, then let's do it.
(hrmmm, I'm probably jumping into the middle. do you need more background first?) 9:52 AM Sarah: no i'm ok. i'm familiar with dryad and treebase, etc. now. 9:53 AM generally i've noticed that molecular and systematic/phylogenetic studies are the ones with more available datasets but i'm not sure if this is also indicative of higher citation rates
Sarah: also, i'm unsure how to go about tracking how/if the datasets are cited beyond search the associated doi/lsid
Heather: yes. 9:54 AM agreed, I don't think it is straightforward.
I think it would have to be tackled with multiple approaches. looking for dataset doi/lsids + 9:55 AM full text searches for accession numbers or accession number patterns +
full text searches for repository names + 9:56 AM maybe looks at the citation context of citations to the papers of studies that create data
Sarah: yeah, that's what i was thinking.
also, on dryad, it's interesting to note that most journals have 1-2 datasets published, but three journals (sysbio, amnat, and molecularBio have 30+ citations)...so what are these journals or their clientle (authors) doing differently? 9:57 AM Heather: so I think it is doable, but not as exhaustive as doing an inventory based on articles within a date range of a journal (for example)
Sarah: is it a difference in attitudes about data sharing, encouragement by the journals themselves/journal policies?
and how do we even go about getting at the proximal causes for that? 9:58 AM Heather: good question, and I don't know all of the answer, but some of the answer is that SysBio for example has had a strict data sharing policy for years, much stricter than many other journals
also, I think Dryad's level of integration with its partner journals varies because it is still ramping up
Sarah: sorry, that's the scientist in me speaking...it'll be a bit of a transition for me to the social sciences
yeah. treebase seems to be more well established
or better solicits data publication
Heather: no, no apologies! those are exactly the sort of questions to be asking I think
yes 9:59 AM for what it is worth, I did a small study on this sort of thing in biomed, looking at journal policies via instruction to author statements.
hold on I'll find the ref
so that is one approach to look at part of the picture 10:00 AM http://elpub.scix.net/cgi-bin/works/Show?001_elpub2008
Sarah: ok. i think that would be a good place for me to start to because then i could get a general idea of trends which would help me firm up research questions
Heather: (did a bit more similar work in my thesis too, but I won't burden you with that ;) ) 10:01 AM say it again, so I am clear? which "that" are you thinking would be a good place to start?
Sarah: sorry, the tracking of citation of the dryad datasets 10:02 AM Heather: ok.
as you do that,
keep in mind that citation of the dryad datasets is probably not typical
Sarah: how so?
Heather: dryad has been pretty explicit about ways that it wants its datasets cited 10:03 AM I think more explicit than other repositories, data shared via journal supplementary information, etc
I think part of the goal of the Dryad-journal-partner-review is to look at 10:04 AM Sarah: yes. i think it would be good to especially look at general citation practices within the top three journals i mentioned
Heather: the current state of data citation practice, and consider that as an estimate of the size of the oppportunity for great data citaiton practices
yes. sounds good. 10:05 AM Sarah: as well as journals like ecology that have been a pioneer in encouraging dataset citation
Heather: sounds good. 10:06 AM Since I'm new to this domain I don't have any knowledge about the journals or their idiosyncracies (other than the one tidbit that sysbio has been requireing data sharing for much longer than any others).
if you could do with more colour and/or opinions about choosing, definitely ask Todd 10:07 AM Sarah: i just know that esa sponsored some of the first meetings about dataset sharing and they have their own data repository...but it only has about 40 datasets in it.
Heather: ah hah! I didn't know that. 10:08 AM yup, I'm guessing write up thoughts about what you are thinking and where you are going... early and often. then feedback from todd and others can help fill in the bits where I'm still adrift. 10:09 AM Sarah: so as we were talking, i've thought of a way to do my preliminary citation cataloging and want to know what you think.
keep in mind, i don't have a background in this, so i might be reinventing the wheel...let me know if there are better ways. 10:10 AM the first approach would be to search for dataset citations as previously mentioned (doi, accession#, etc) 10:12 AM then, i think it would be good to take a random sample of articles in the journals (sysbio, ecology, etc ....as well as other dryad partners) and do a more in-depth article by article search of what types of datasets they are citing....i.e. URLs, personal coorespondence with an author, data repositories, etc.
basically categorize what datasets are being cited and how they are cited.
Heather: YES I totally agree
Sarah: i don't know, maybe that's old news 10:13 AM Heather: Nope, I think that is exactly the news we are looking for
Sarah: are there some standard methods or techniques for doing this that i should be aware of? 10:14 AM Heather: hrm. I'm not sure yet.
Sarah: like text searching software beyond what ISI web of science/etc do?
or coding techniques for the data?
Heather: the answer is at least partly yes, there are some established ways 10:15 AM for example, there is qualitative coding software (atlas.ti, others)
though it may be overkill (+ not very open) for what you are looking to do 10:16 AM a google spreadsheet might go a long way :)
in part the answer to this might become more clear when you have a better idea of how much you anticipate coding in each article...
what variables are you looking to extract and collect 10:17 AM to address the other part of your question, about searching, I think I don't entirely know yet
Sarah: i'm not exactly sure what variables at this point, i started a rough spreadsheet of my original ideas but nothing firm yet
i'd need to peruse a few "test" articles first
Heather: because my experience with searching is in biomedicine where there is PubMed, PubMed Central, Highwire Press, and other resources that may not be applicable or as applicable in this domain
yup, totally. 10:18 AM so actually I'd love to ask you:
what tools do you use if you want to search full text of journal articles for a specific research topic? Google scholar? the journal's website? any other aggregator or tool? 10:19 AM Sarah: i've traditionally used ISI web of knowledge because that was the primary science database my university promoted, but I've also used google scholar and others. 10:20 AM i'm not familiar with the term "aggregator". what does that refere to? 10:21 AM Heather: I was using aggregator to refer to a single site/source from which you could query full-text of many sources... a resource that aggregates the full text of many sources for querying in one central location. google scholar, scirus, etc.
can you query full text from within ISI? curious.
Sarah: ok. i'm not familiar with scirus either. is there a particular aggregator you recommend? 10:22 AM yes you can query full text in isi
Heather: I've used PubMed Central (probably not relevant, but worth looking), Highwire Press (ditto), Google Scholar, Scirus.
Good to know about ISI!
Sarah: also, i use a compiler/bibliography software called zotero which extracts information from amazon, google scholar, isi, etc and it sets up its own full text search 10:23 AM Heather: I've used ISI for citation lookups, but not full text. Also used Scopus for citaiton data etc.
Sarah: i like zotero (more than endnote) b/c i just save anything i search and then i can search within my own subset of accumulated sources
Heather: ok, good. I used zotero briefly in its early days but not recently.
Sarah: it's great these days 10:24 AM Heather: I hear you. I use a combo of citeulike and Papers (mac desktop PDF organizer)... maybe will look into zotero again.
Sarah: anyways, is scirus open access or subscription? 10:25 AM Heather: scirus is like google scholar but with cleaner data (and less coverage). free to query, but might need subscription to read the actual article. definitely worth a look, useful in some contexts. 10:26 AM I have no idea now prevalent data reuse is in the journals you might consider. One idea could be to steer clear of querying to start with, since this is a discovery phase, and in some senses we don't know what to query for. 10:27 AM start instead with just a manual review of "all articles in Jan-March 2010 of these three journals" or something. ???
Sarah: yeah. i was thinking that and/or a random sample of articles.
Heather: yup. 10:28 AM after starting there, it might become clear how querying could be used to look at a wider subset, acknowledging that it is only likely to catch x% of reuse cases or something... 10:29 AM Sarah: yeah i agree. It would be good to throughly document dataset usage manually for a small subset and then search that same subset with different query methods to see what picks up the most
Heather: agreed. 10:30 AM Sarah: i do have two somewhat related questions if you feel like this is resolved for now 10:31 AM Heather: yes
Sarah: these are kind of background on dryad that you may or may not know
first, do we know if dryad (or daac, etc) datasets are catalogued by aggregators? 10:32 AM Heather: Good question. I don't know. Todd would (obviously).
Sarah: okay, and what is dryad's relationship with journals and dataone? 10:33 AM Heather: yes, I do know some about this one.
hold on just a sec, let me look in my inbox to see if I still have a good description todd sent me, to start 10:34 AM Hrm, I'll find it later 10:35 AM ok, so Dryad and the journals is easiest (at least for me)
and I'll throw in a bit about NESCent. Do you know about NESCent?
Sarah: just recently, not in depth 10:36 AM Heather: NESCent (as I understand it) is an NSF-funded physical place in north carolina devoted to promoting big thoughts and results in synthetic biology
they do this by facilitating people coming together who might not otherwise
hosting postdocs, etc
Sarah: so...an nsf thinktank of sorts 10:37 AM Heather: NESCent is related to Duke and UNC and NC State.
been around for a few years, has funding for more.
beautiful space, btw. very energetic, etc.
So I think lots of really smart people get together there for a week, or people have sabbaticals there, etc. 10:38 AM a few years ago, as I understand it, a group got together and said "we want more data! we could do more things if we had more data! people shoudl share more data"
well, I mean a group was already together for other purposes, but that sentiment emerged strongly.
and they decided to do something about it.
they wanted journals to require data sharing 10:39 AM but there was actually no where to put this type of data they were thinking about.
heterogeneous synthetic biology data
so they said, let's do two things in parallel. they will be related, though also they each could be independent and separate. 10:40 AM first, let's build and host a best-practices repository to put this kind of stuff. let's call it Dryad. (I think driade initially? something like that. dryad now)
second, let's approach the journal editors of the top five journals in this field, and ask if they will make data submission manditory. 10:41 AM ideally, they all make it manditory at the same time. we can suggest (mandate? I think suggest) Dryad as a destination for the datasets. 10:42 AM So they did this, and lo and behold convinced (I think the big five? plus more? any holdouts? I don't think any holdouts) journals do to this.
Editorials have been published in the last few months by most of these big five, saying "ok, in one year data sharing is going to be manditory! here is why" 10:43 AM at the same time, dryad is accepting voluntary submissions and flushing out how it will handle metadata and building links to the journal websites so that data depositing is simple, etc.
Also, Dryad is trying to figure out how it can get continued funding, since the NSF doesn't like to do foreverandever funding for databases. their plan is to ask journals for sponsorship, and they are working on this, generally with success. 10:44 AM So this project is important to Dryad, especially to the extent it focuses on jorunals relevant to or partners with Dryad.
Helps define the scope of the number of data citations that might ultimately point to the Dryad repository from its partner journals. 10:45 AM does that help?
Sarah: yes alot. it was difficult to discern all that background from what they actually post on their wiki. i do have a few questions.
Heather: yes I can imagine :) 10:46 AM Sarah: 1. who are the big five? 2. do these journals really make data sharing mandatory and in what way?
you don't have to explain it all if you have a source/ciation that can answer that question
Heather: 1. I don't know off the top of my head, but I think it is clear from the website partners page, I'll look 10:47 AM 2. they don't make it mandatory yet, but they will starting next year (Jan 2011? I don;t remember the exact date).
I'll forward you a few of the editorials, I think they will help
Heather: the one exception is that sysbio (I think that is the one) has made it a requirement for years, because the editor has always felt very strongly about it 10:48 AM Sarah: i see. that makes sense
ok, my next question, what are the alternatives to dryad?
you mentioned that the journals can contract with dryad but that dataset sharing doesn't necessarily need to occur usind dryad 10:49 AM Heather: fyi, I'm guessing that summarizing this info woudl be very useful for multiple people (and would give todd/others the opportunity to correct any misinformation I'm propogating).
oh, that reminds me, I think Todd wrote a paper recently that might have some of this history. let me look for it.
I'll send it later
Sarah: ok. that's fine. 10:50 AM Heather: alternatives to dryad: I'm not sure.
Sarah: mostly treebank and genbank and such?
Heather: I may be wrong about whether journals require submission to Dryad per se or not.
Yes, so I think the general recommendation is that if there is a datatype specific best-practices location, then it shoudl go there. So Genbank, Treebase. 10:51 AM Sarah: ok. i was just wondering if in the long term there is a hope for a general repository catagorized by journal or if it would be more by topic (i.e. geneticists at genbank, phylo at treebase, etc) and then the journal maintains the metadata of where the dataset is
Heather: I think that ideally Dryad wants the info to be in both places, or at least for it to live in Genbank/Treebase but Dryad knows about it too. So data submission woudl be through Dryad and Dryad woudl hand it off to Genbank/Treebase as appropriate for submisison there. Not sure where that stands, I think it isn't implemented yet. 10:52 AM Hmmm, I think Dryad's vision is tha tDryad houses the metadata.
those are more technicalities, but useful for me to wrap my head around things 10:53 AM Heather: Since journals aren't experts at doing that, and there is benefit to it being all in one place, in a discipline-specific repository
Journals would "outsource" that to Dryad, and Dryad would do it well and better and cheaper than journals could.
Sarah: ok. that makes sense
Heather: yup, I get it. That's exactly why I know these things, because I asked the same questions :)
now, Dryad and DataONE 10:54 AM op, unless you have more Dryad and journals questions?
Sarah: no, proceed
Heather: ok, so I'm a little fuzzier here (which is unfortunate, since my postdoc is funded by DataONE, but heh it'll come). 10:55 AM So I think DataONE is an NSF funded virtual cyberinfrastructure project, focusing on earth and environmental data.
So the info that Dryad focuses on is related, but a small part.
Most of DataONE's partners are "big science", so large labs, lots of collaboration, huge datasets. 10:56 AM Dryad, in contast, focuses on "small science." Small-to-medium sized labs and collaborations and datasets. 10:57 AM So DataONE has lots of partners, of which Dryad is one. And not a typical one. But probably a valuable one.
I don't understand the DataONE architecture at all yet, but I think the idea is that Dryad will be one of many data-sources. 10:58 AM So there will be some interface aggregating the datasets at Dryad etc that can be queried through some pan-DataONE site.
Hey, this probably addresses some of your question about whether the datasets are being aggreggated at all. 10:59 AM The answer, I think, is yes, by DataONE. I heard yesterday that that part is supposed to go live in July, with Dryad as one of the initial 3 or 4 nodes. ??? 11:00 AM So questions of interest to Dryad are of interest to DataONE also, but they often have a slightly different focus because Dryad is focused on small science and DataONE more on big science.
Heather: that help? other ????s
Sarah: so in the dryad research should i focus on the journals with more earth/enviromental data, or stay general (i.e. random sampling of articles, top journals, etc)? 11:01 AM Heather: Good question. I don't know. I guess it depends on what question you want to answer and how you want to motivate it.
One possibility is certainly to use the Dryad partner journals as the set. That would certainly have value to Dryad and has some built-in selection criteria and focus.
Sarah: ok i'll think more on that as i get into it
Heather: But if you'd rather do something else, there could be reason for that too. 11:02 AM http://www.datadryad.org/partners
Sarah: i think those are the main questions i have for now. i've got a lot to read up on and get started on. and the person i'm meeting with is finally here....late as expected, so i'm glad we kept talking. 11:03 AM Heather: good! bye for now then.
I'll follow up with some promised references, and let me know how the blog setting up / initial thinking goes!
Sarah: this has been really helpful. if you can forward me the articles/sources you mentioned over the course of our conservation that'd be great. I'll start working on the ideas we talked about. then I'll email you early next week about my progress/questions. i'll have voice chat setup by then. 11:04 AM Heather: will do :)
Sarah: just one last thing i'm wondering. in the spirit of open science, should we maybe post our chats on the wetware site? Maybe make them accessible to dataone people but maybe not public....or all public depending on how sensitive you think what we discussed is to the project?
Heather: yup, sounds good to me :) Nice job jumping in with two feet :)
Be the change you want to see, eh? 11:05 AM Have a good weekend, Sarah. Really nice to chat with you.
Sarah: great. thanks again