Update biodiversity.md - #1860
Conversation
added biodiv-FC tool / usage which is being beta-tested
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- I would recommend moving this to the subsection below, which is explicitly about checklists and would be a better fit IMO.
- FAIR checker should be added to the list of tools here. I can help with that. (DONE)
- @nsjuty, you can consider adding yourself to the list of contributors. If you decide to do so, add your info here
Adding FAIR-checker to the table of tools
Adding missing id
fixing indentation issue
typo/grammar
| - name: FAIR-checker | ||
| id: fair-checker | ||
| description: FAIR-Checker is a tool aimed at assessing FAIR principles and empowering data provider to enhance the quality of their digital resources. | ||
| registry: | ||
| biotools: FAIR-Checker | ||
| url: https://fair-checker.france-bioinformatique.fr/ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FAIR Checker is already present as a national tool, so does not need to be added as a duplicated to the tools and resources IMO
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bedroesb I would say it is the other way around, and this tool should be in the general table. It is provided by France, but not limited to a French audience. (PS I am on holiday, so do not expect quick responses).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I saw it was listed, but I don't know how to 'reference' an RDMkit 'tool' entry into the text that I wrote for this section. Help appreciated!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bianchini88 I am fine with it becoming a general tool, but that I would remove the one on the national page and list the tool as "This country contributes to"... We do not want duplications.
I think it fits in both to be honest - i looked at both options, but as a more general 'validation against schemas' tool, the upper section (where I put it) is a bit more general.. The subsection below would put it into one of the checklist secions, and its really not limited to a specific CL...the mapping across different checklists is what we will promote (so I think its higher up) |
I do not disagree with this, @nsjuty. However, ENA and its checklists are first introduced in the section below, so it feels a bit off to introduce these concepts in the context of FAIR Checker before mentioning them more generally. Optionally, one could also break down the FAIR Checker text into multiple bits: one more general about validation first and one about the actual usage of the checklist. |
Changing category for FAIR-checker, as it is a general service aimed at an international audience.
|
I agree with @bianchini88 comments here. I think it would be better for the understandability of the text as a standalone to first introduce checklists before their validation. |
korbinib
left a comment
korbinib
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suggest to restructure the sections about ENA checklists and the FAIRchecker.
Co-authored-by: Korbinian Bösl <korbinian.bosl@uib.no>
4 participants
added biodiv-FC tool / usage which is being beta-tested