- Huaiyu Mi (HM)
- Stuart Moodie (SM)
- Anatoly Sorokin (AS)
- Falk Schreiber (FS)
- Tobias Czauderna (TC)
Meeting minutes from Gatersleben meeting
- AS: provide links to the Google docs on sbgn.org
- HM: Which meeting?
- FS: Editors meeting in Gatersleben (Germany) 16th and 17th of December 2013, basically review of the specifications and what needs to be done for Level 1 Version 2 specs
- FS: export pdfs and put it on sbgn.org
- AS: will do it
Release of the next version of ER specification
- FS: This relates to Nicolas' mail on the mailing list.
- FS, SM: We should check the meeting notes from the Gatersleben meeting and see what still needs to be done.
- AS: What about the synchronisation event I have proposed?
- TC, FS, SM: This was planned for Level 2, wasn't it?
- AS: What about removing 'delay'?
- AS: We should release it around Harmony 2014.
- AS, HM: Removing 'delay' will take some time (discussion and so on). Should be Level 2 then.
- AS: I have fixed a lot of things.
- AS: I can finish it by end of February 2014 and will send it to the editors first. Afterwards it will be sent for public approval.
- AS: I would like to send it for public approval latest end of March. Then we can take feedback during Harmony.
Next version of PD specification
- SM: I started to work on the spec recently again and will do some more work in the next time.
- SM: We should try to have a draft for Harmony as well.
Next version of AF specification
- HM: I'm currently working on the LEGO project. They didn't fully accept AF yet for their work because it doesn't completely cover what they need.
- HM: I currently try to capture what exactly they need.
- FS: But necessary changes should be Level 2 then, right?
- HM: Yes, we could do it.
- TC: Can we invite someone to Combine?
- HM: Yes, should be possible.
- FS: Should we have the next version for Harmony as well?
- HM: The only change was the process.
- TC: We should review the meeting notes from Gatersleben meeting because there was some confusion.
- TC: Process is in the spec but there was no vote.
- AS: Yes, there was a vote about phenotype but not about process.
- HM: We should check, I will provide a link to a mail from the mailing list.
- FS: We should have a version for Harmony. We need to add 'annotation'.
Planning of HARMONY 2014
- FS: Who will be there?
- FS, HM, TC: No.
- SM: In principle I could go but I need to fund myself.
- AS: I'm not sure.
- SM: Anatoly, if you come to Edinburgh we could go together.
- SM, TC: Maybe some funding is available for editors?
- AS: I will know if I can go by beginning of March.
- FS: It might be good if SBGN can be represented.
- TC: Let's discuss it during next meeting again.
Planning of COMBINE 2014
- HM: We can support the editors. Let me know if someone needs a letter of support.
- HM: We will have the SBGN meeting on 16th and 17th of August.
- FS: We should announce it soon.
- SM: I can't be there for the whole Combine but I will be there for the SBGN meeting.
Plannning of ICSB 2014
- AS: I won't go.
- SM: I won't go as well.
- FS: Tobias or I will be there. We will take part in the Combine tutorial which is planned for ICSB.
- HM: I'm still trying to figure out if I can go.
SBGN Review Paper
- FS: We got a response to the NAR inquiry. They want us to take into account other approaches as well and compare them to SBGN.
- SM: We probably should go for a different journal then.
- TC: Yes, otherwise we might loose the focus on what we actually wanted to submit.