The (Re)usable Data Project curates (life-?)science data sources for a number of reusability criteria. The Phenoscape KB is currently not among its curated sources. While someone from the Phenoscape team could submit an entry, I think that's contrary to the point. For example, some of the stated evaluation criteria are about how easy it was to find a license for the data, and how clearly it is stated, aside from what it is. I think this calls for someone external to the project to submit the entry, which would more honestly reflect the experience someone from the community would have coming to the site.
I would also imagine that such an external evaluation (you might call it an audit) along the stated criteria will surface some issues that would subtract points. Phenoscape is committed to maximize reusability (within realistically achievable means), and so surfacing such issues would be welcome, and provide opportunities to correct them (perhaps right at the workshop).
The (Re)usable Data Project curates (life-?)science data sources for a number of reusability criteria. The Phenoscape KB is currently not among its curated sources. While someone from the Phenoscape team could submit an entry, I think that's contrary to the point. For example, some of the stated evaluation criteria are about how easy it was to find a license for the data, and how clearly it is stated, aside from what it is. I think this calls for someone external to the project to submit the entry, which would more honestly reflect the experience someone from the community would have coming to the site.
I would also imagine that such an external evaluation (you might call it an audit) along the stated criteria will surface some issues that would subtract points. Phenoscape is committed to maximize reusability (within realistically achievable means), and so surfacing such issues would be welcome, and provide opportunities to correct them (perhaps right at the workshop).
@mellybelly: anything you'd like to add?