220 likes | 281 Views
Current deposition features. Auto-completion. Yes, absolutely improtant. Clear indication of incomplete sections.
E N D
Auto-completion Yes, absolutely improtant.
Clear indication of incomplete sections NO: All the statistics should be harvested at the time of upload. The harvest tool (pdb_extract) should be embedded as first step to extract all the values including phases and refinement log file. Upload → Extract (harvest tool) → Populate values After above steps, then the interface can show completeness (should be all green if above process is implemented).
Clear indication of incomplete fields Upload → Extract (harvest tool) → Populate values Most of the values should be in. It would only be red if harvest tool fails to extract some data for some format reason.
Live preview of deposition Yes, but suggest to be in a report form instead of format specific.
Encrypted URLs http://www.domain.org/pdb/future_deposition_system?param=QovCsvhNv04DkRW4SMO3Ipy8FMFS2TSPXWLUBGXNtNZJYQEgGTOsHNCk96bn8DKfdcVj1CXiLIQ%3D
Regular expression patterns used to validate fields Excellent.
Duplication of completed sections to minimize manual input of data Not sure why duplication would apply to heterogens. This function would be very useful for author's information: contact info, author names in both entry and citation list.
Database lookup of certain data for improved auto-completion Good idea. But can author edit this field if the database information is not what is in the file?
Password protection of deposition Absolutely. We need to think about the group privilege. If a student who knows the pwd has left, do we allow the same group to reset pwd?
Validation of data between fields on the same page and also between fields that appear in different sections. Yes. Also needs to check across the file- resolution high in both refinement and data collection for both overall and highest shell.
Validation of deposition prior to submission Should be part of deposition system (integrated). In addition have stone alone validation for dep preparation.
Validation (serious errors) What are considered as serious errors? Need to lay out more.
Validation summary Aren't we going to use Task Force recommended one?
Feedback of curation issues and data to depositor in the same interface (Processed files and reports)
Needs to add download for mmCIF file Suggest to add: 1. Issues to be addressed 2. Summary report in the above links
I assume we will incorporate new validation from Task Force.
PISA not PQS? Suggest to have Asym unit image side by side with BU fpr comparison