Discuss issue with Projects vs Papers

[alexsb]

We need to figure out how we handle projects in the future.

Issues:

• What is a "project", what is only a paper? I guess the main case in the current format where that makes a difference is when we have multiple publications for a project, like for StratomeX and the Pathway stuff.
• Content is currently duplicated and ambiguous.

Suggestion: We introduce larger classes of projects. Specifically, I'd suggest:

• Omics data visualization
  • StratomeX
  • Domino
  • Furby
• Biological Networks
  • enRoute
  • Entourage
  • Pathfinder
• Genomics / Transcriptomics
  • Vials
• General Purpose Visualization Tools
  • LineUp
  • UpSet
  • Contour
• Desktop Exploration tools
  • Hidden Content
  • Potential future Geymayer projects

We could also kick the hidden content stuff from the website again, since CaleydoPlex is over and this isn't really a Caleydo project and doesn't make sense on the website.

[cpartl]

So do you want to replace the projects with project classes where you basically make a union of the current projects on a single page? The suggested structure is good, but you could argue that some projects fit multiple classes. For example, domino and pathfinder also fit general purpose tools.

About hidden content stuff: are there any links to the website in the papers?

[alexsb]

I don't want to go into as much detail on the project pages anymore, I'd rather have the paper pages show the details. There shouldn't be a heading for each of StratomeX, Domino, and Furby on the omics page, for example. But what I'd like to do is to connect the tools - what makes sense for which type of data and tasks.

Yes, there are duplications, and we could mention tools multiple times. I don't like all of these categories yet - General purpose vis is too broad, for example. Omics isn't quite the right word.

Hidden content ist linked to http://hidden-content.caleydo.org/ - that's independent of the main page.

[mstreit]

I think that's a good idea and we should go forward with this. I also agree that the hidden content work can be removed.

[ngehlenborg]

I agree with replacing project pages with "theme" pages but target audiences really are important here: do we care about users, developers, fellow visualization researchers?

[alexsb]

OK, we briefly talked about this and propose the following restructuring:

Instead of projects, we introduce "themes". Themes can be anything, from a "cancer" theme, to a "caleydo web theme", i.e., any larger bracket that we want to have around projects. We will start with three themes:

• cancer
• caleydo web
• graphs/networks

[alexsb]

We also chose to create a tools page which should be a high-level description of usable software tools.