You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I propose that we implement Protocols the same way that we handle workflows in the next major toolstack update.
Namely, i think lab protocols should have their own top-level folder, and their own data model object, so that they can be re-used in all studies/assays, and have their own associated metadata (e.g., ontologized parameters). Protocols are the wet-lab equivalent of workflows, and i think we should offer their annotation and use the exact same way.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
I propose that we implement Protocols the same way that we handle workflows in the next major toolstack update.
Namely, i think lab protocols should have their own top-level folder, and their own data model object, so that they can be re-used in all studies/assays, and have their own associated metadata (e.g., ontologized parameters). Protocols are the wet-lab equivalent of workflows, and i think we should offer their annotation and use the exact same way.
Also related: https://github.com/orgs/nfdi4plants/discussions/26, as this would enable re-using protocols from other arcs
cc @Freymaurer @HLWeil
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions