Closed emhart closed 8 years ago
+1 for me
I'm fine with the response. Could make a few minor tweaks which might satisfy reviewer:
I agree with @emhart but also with @PBarmby's suggestion about pointing out the existing privacy section as relevant to biomed data.
I also think we should add in a few more mentions of e.g. NCBI/EMBL as repositories for all types of sequencing data. Then I think we could respond to this comment from the review with a few different things, which might be more effective. I think this could go in the permanent identifier section (mention NCBI Accession.Versions vs GI identifiers, which are being phased out) and in the metadata section, where we can mention several tools for formatting and uploading metadata to, e.g., the NCBI SRA with mothur.
Thanks all! @naupaka I tried my best to incorporate your comments into the manuscript. This is a bit out of my realm of expertise so I'd love another set of eyes on it just to make sure it reads correctly. If so I think we can do one last pass and then I'll do the re-submission.
Thanks! If you merge this @emhart I will take one more pass to check for typos and smooth out wording if needed. Probably easier than me trying to add commits on top of your PR.
Holding off on merging until I get a bit more feedback from folks.