Repository navigation
Further define bioinformatics taxonomy facets #11
Description
Currently we have a high level of the IA facets at https://embl-design-language.github.io/Springboard/information-architecture/#facet-structure-and-categories
They are:
1. Who
- people
- groups and teams
1. What
- research
- Cell Biology and Biophysics
- Developmental Biology
- Genome Biology
- Structural and Computational Biology
- Directors' Research
- Tissue biology and disease modelling
- Mouse biology
- Bioinformatics (EBI)
- services
- online services (EBI)
- core facilities
- training
- online/external
- online bioinformatic services (EBI)
- collaboration
- industry transfer
- inspiration
- about
- news
- jobs
- mission statement
- organisational information
1. Where
- Heidelberg
- Barcelona
- Grenoble
- Hamburg
- Hinxton
- Rome
Not expressed are the bioinformatics sub categories:
- DNA & RNA
- Gene Expression
- Proteins
- Structures
- Systems
- Chemical biology
- Ontologies
- Literature
- Cross domain
- Type
- Database
- Tool
These would apply under:
what:services:online-serviceswhat:research:bioinformaticswhat:training:training:online:bioinformatics
It would be redundant to list the bioinformatics sub categories three times, so instead it should be listed as a "special meta-taxonomy"(?), along with EDAM, I think.
Activity
khawkins98 commentedon Sep 14, 2017
After a chat with @jonathanhickford , I think this bioinformatic taxonomy is worth having, but not part of our "Central EMBL IA". Rather a supplemental one that can be used by content and pages, as can EDAM.
jonathanhickford commentedon Sep 15, 2017
Potentially silly question. Can content live under multiple values for the what taxonomy? E.g. can I be bioinformatics and mouse biology research?
khawkins98 commentedon Sep 15, 2017
I'd think the answer is that content should live (be presented) anywhere a user expects to find it.
So the answer, I'd say: quite possibly, yes, content may be presented in multiple locations. But we definitely don't want to maintain it in two locations, so we need a system that allow content to be queryable.
markboulton commentedon Sep 15, 2017
Let me see if I understand this. Are we saying that content has a single source, but can be reached through several routes and have different taxonomy labels?
khawkins98 commentedon Sep 15, 2017
Yes/no 🙃
Content is accesable through many paths, but has one canonical URL.
Here's how I'm imagining it:
jonathanhickford commentedon Sep 15, 2017
That right.
Say it's biographical content about Paul Flicek (who for context runs multiple EMBL-EBI bioinformatics services, and a research team that research mouse biology and genome biology) he might end up something like:
On that page we might want to:
khawkins98 commentedon Sep 15, 2017
I think @jonathanhickford and I may have posted at the same time, but I think we're saying the same thing, or at least the same thing from slightly different angles.
jonathanhickford commentedon Sep 15, 2017
Tag driven site war story one:
We perhaps mitigate against that here by having editorially controlled 'content' pages. However I think there's a risk we end up with the problem occuring at the 'directory' or 'facet' level. For example does every page on the website seem to offer you links to Paul Flicek.
This is probably an issue for much further down the line, and I'm perhaps jumping the gun in thinking that the facets are not manually curated, which we could always do for the more complex ones.
markboulton commentedon Sep 18, 2017
Ok, got it. Thanks for the clarification, both.