David Nickerson wrote:
>> In the case that I have in fact created a new version, I have updated
>> the model status. Since there's currently no annotation framework as
>> such, and since I have really just started and am learning what needs to
>> be said etc as I go, some of the annotation I've put to models that I
>> fixed earlier isn't consistent with what I'm doing now. The model
>> documentation can't be changed from the page - the file needs to be
>> downloaded, changed and then reuploaded.
>
> yep - its certainly a pain, but about the best we can do at the moment...
>
>> At the moment I'm primarily saying what version the current version was
>> updated from, by who, and when (if I know). Some of my earlier
>> annotations included the error that the previous version was producing.
>> This can produce a lot of text though, particularly when it requires
>> listing scores of variables that couldn't be defined etc. I do have all
>> this information (regarding how a particular model was fixed, that is,)
>> documented on my computer, however.
>>
>> Does anyone have any comments or proposals, formal or informal,
>> concerning what information needs to be included in the model status
>> documentation? The more consistent I can be now, the less I'll have to
>> go back and redo in the future.
>
> could you give some examples of both your earlier and more recent models
> so we can have a look. The model status should probably be the brief
> statement that it sounds like you are using now. The actual changes can
> (and should?) be annotated in the metadata modification history.
>
>
> David.
>
>
Example of newer annotation:
http://www.cellml.org/models/earm_noble_1990_version03/
Example of older annotation:
http://www.cellml.org/models/tentusscher_noble_noble_panfilov_2003_version04
|
