Examples versus nascent state

[TheiBa]

@Yuri05: your decision; but I would rename the Examples to "Nascent state" or alternative wording discussed in other issue, and include "Example" as one topic there along with e.g. the publication list; also "Examples" is a sub-optimal wording: all hands-on and even video-tutorials could be interpretet as "Examples" as well; I think the Examples in the current Example-category are osp-models ... which is an emerging/nascent state category, which be better indicate as such to not disappoint people ... so proposal:

Category: In the nascent state

• OSP-models: growing library of example models published on OSP. For example, the glucose insulin model is not only scientifically exciting for diabetes researchers, but technically exciting for everyone with PBPK models of glucose, insulin, and glucagon coupled through non-mechanistic PD as well as systems pharmacology PD models.

• Publications: Publications of all kinds relating to OSP software, including growing list of journal publications, where PK-Sim was used. Look at what others have done and add your own appropriate publications from journals or on OSP.

• Progress and planning: projects started to provide an overview and things available and to come ... wenn geplant?

[msevestre]

We have to keep in mind that the category title (absolutely NOT nascent state in any language! :)) needs to be short and sweet.

[TheiBa]

Well, I think in English language, nascent is a normal word and appropriate in this context, apart from being used in every molecular biology and most chemistry books, I guess. Anyway, I am fine with alternative wording proposals, call it in embryo, developing, whatever – the main part of this issue was to have such a category and to deal better with the little defined “Examples” …

[msevestre]

Maybe that's just the idea of talking explicitly about stuff that is so far from completion that really no one can use it, that is a bit counter intuitive. I think we need to spark people's interest with stuff that they can use and not only with stuff that they may be able to use in 2 years from now

[TheiBa]

? well the publication list is there, at least with entries from our side. so are substance models, just limited in number at the moment, similar one could right away start a substance library, and I think we should get high 2 digit model files on OSP in 2017, published examples being in the same size. But if I am the only one who considers this helpful, I shut up right-away ;-) oao

[msevestre]

I think this is very helpful .,.. So we are in full agreement there :) We are back to square one and the terminology. We need to find a word that shows a state of maturity yet continuous improvement. Nascent simply does not fit because it means "Just been born", or just "coming to existence". Work in Progress is also not great because some work is definitely done.

While I do not like that wording either, it goes more into the direction of "Show Case" or "Use Case" don't you think? e.g. WHAT CAN YOU DO WITH IT?

[TheiBa]

ok ... guess Use Cases would be my preference then ... or Arising, Developing from the other angle - it is that the concept is still earlier in development than, e.g. the software itself

[Yuri05]

My proposal: rename the category to the Case Studies with 2 subcategories:

• Examples (or Example models or just Models) (which is currently only GIM)
• Publications (or Journal publications) (link would be Journal Publications) (we must tag all journal publications with the Journal label!! currently only few of them have it)

Regarding substance models: as we don't have any at the moment, it's not worth discussing. As soon as we have some (and more than just 3-4) we can think about the 3rd subcategory

[msevestre]

Why not point directly to https://github.com/Open-Systems-Pharmacology/OSP-based-publications-and-content/issues

[TheiBa]

OK, but might be confusing, as there are, depending on the view angel, very different things in there. I guess my pref would be

https://github.com/Open-Systems-Pharmacology/OSP-based-publications-and-content

and then a ReadMe refinement with category listing and links

[msevestre]

@all: I don't follow what is expected here again

Here is what I understood: 1: Rename Examples to Case Studies

Then that's it... What is a subcategoriy Juri Do you mean one of this section with title and description? Or is this something new that we do not have yet?

Let say you want to split the information into two columns (Left Models, right publications)

I have one entry for Model (GIM) Fine

What about pulbication? I also need one entry at least with title and description.

Is this what is meant?

[msevestre]

Ok I have updated the website with 2 categories and some dummy text for publication.

[Yuri05]

I guess we can close this issue now?

[TheiBa]

What happened to the idea of creating an pub-issue for each model and than linking at browse all models to https://github.com/Open-Systems-Pharmacology/OSP-based-publications-and-content/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aopen%20is%3Aissue%20label%3Aosp-model instead of https://github.com/Open-Systems-Pharmacology?q=%22osp-model%22 ? Also, what about the idea to add a "Substance library Project" to that repo?

Apart from what we have, models from Andre will be online in the next days? And then we should also "release" the website very soon - ACoP ahead.

[msevestre]

I am a bit lost here. Why do we have the same tag at different level here? Should not we remove one? (either or I have no preference). I can update the url osp-models-open-systems-pharmacology.org easily

[msevestre]

if we go with this version, the GIM Model should be referenced here as well

[TheiBa]

Yes, of course. Every model popping up at https://github.com/Open-Systems-Pharmacology?q=%22osp-model%22 should get an issue entry in the pub repo, also the GIM, at least that was my proposal ...

[TheiBa]

and what do you mean with updating the URL? That would be the release? I would suggest that we than also re-route www.systems-biology.com and everything ending there to OSP? And announce on linked-in and trigger what ever else might be planned ... good to create some fuzz before ACoP, so people approach us with - "Yeah, I saw ... " and not "Oh, is that still alive? ... "

[msevestre]

I meant http://osp-models.open-systems-pharmacology.org