outline repo in readme - Githubissues

PSLmodels / UBI-examples

UBI analyses using Tax-Calculator, TaxData, and C-TAM

MIT License

5 stars 7 forks source link

outline repo in readme #1

Closed MattHJensen closed 7 years ago

MattHJensen commented 7 years ago

Proposed outline for this repo.

If we adopt this outline, I imagine we would will label issues by project using an "ex#" tag. So anything that has to do with the first paper would use an ex1 label and so forth.

cc @econ02 @andersonfrailey @Amy-Xu

MattHJensen commented 7 years ago

@Amy-Xu, could you review this PR and merge if it looks good?

@andersonfrailey, after this is merged, could you open a PR adding the ex1 materials as indicated in the readme?

Amy-Xu commented 7 years ago

Do we need to add a brief summary for each example?
I imagine most users of this repo do not need the link to google doc, do they? An alternative is to contact you for the editable version. A side issue that I have been thinking about for a while is that should we move all those google docs to shared google account?
Instead of having a empty example 2, may we could have a section of prospective ideas that includes more specifics like transitional solution etc?

MattHJensen commented 7 years ago

@amy-xu asked:

Do we need to add a brief summary for each example?

See the latest commit that adds abstracts in their own section underneath (this follows the NBER working paper newsletter's style)

I imagine most users of this repo do not need the link to google doc, do they?

The reason I included that is to make it as easy as possible for people to contribute to the project. What if we include a link that allows for commenting but not editing:

MattHJensen commented 7 years ago

@Amy-Xu said:

A side issue that I have been thinking about for a while is that should we move all those google docs to shared google account?

Who would own the google doc? I don't think they should be "OSPC" owned as they don't have anything to do with the webapps. I'm inclined to think they should be owned by one of the authors -- perhaps it should be me.

Instead of having a empty example 2, may we could have a section of prospective ideas that includes more specifics like transitional solution etc?

I agree, as soon as we have an working title for the second section we should update from "untitled" to the working title. But I didn't want to have to resolve the working title for ex2 in this PR, so I left it as is for now.

Amy-Xu commented 7 years ago

@MattHJensen

The reason I included that is to make it as easy as possible for people to contribute to the project. What if we include a link that allows for commenting but not editing:

That sounds good to me.

LGTM. Merging.