David Nickerson wrote: > Wilfred Li wrote: >> Maybe instead of the star system, which may be open to interpretation at >> first sight, an abbreviation or a specific word may be used to represent >> its status? > > I guess that if you use something that looks fairly common and standard > people will think they know what it means without looking for an actual > meaning (i.e., the more stars the better), whereas if you use something > a bit different (plain text or graphical) then people are more likely to > look-up and try to understand the meaning and implications. > > The trick is that if its too different, then it may just turn people off > all together... > > Maybe just a simple list of checkboxes with the labels: Level 1, Level > 2,... would suffice? The labels could then be links to the appropriate > definitions. > _______________________________________________ > cellml-discussion mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
Or perhaps, a star system along with a link to a page that elaborates on the curation status of the model specifically. Perhaps a few paragraphs on exactly where the model is at, and what work it requires to get to the next level of curation (taking into account that getting to the next level might break the current level.) This would, of course, require a system where files could be associated with models in a neater manner, that is, a hierarchical system. _______________________________________________ cellml-discussion mailing list [email protected] http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
