> Ususally the most important information is the first and last step
> E.g.
> The TopHat run should be called 
> TopHat on SOLiD 24A
> 
> The alignment stats should be 
> SAM/BAM Summary Metrics of Solid 24A
> With the rest of the tools in the chain identified in the "more information" 
> box.
> 
> This would also give graph generating tools a fighting chance to present 
> something useful in any graphs generated.
> E.g.
> GC Bias Plot of Solid 24A could have a title of Solid 24A instead of 
> dataset_234.dat
> 
> What do you think of this first-last model?

This model breaks down during experimentation. E.g. let's say three different 
methods for trimming a FastQ dataset are tried before mapping with Bowtie. 
Currently, the Bowtie runs are named differently b/c each trimmed dataset is a 
unique input. Using first-last model, all datasets are named the same and it is 
not possible to differentiate b/t them without looking at the inputs, which 
requires clicking on the rerun/info button and finding the input(s). The 
current approach used by Galaxy lists the inputs in the dataset title to avoid 
these issues.

Datasets with the same name becomes more problematic as more steps are added 
b/t first and last because, while they have the same name, the steps taken to 
produce them may be very different.

The first-last model could be nice for workflows, though, perhaps as an 
extension of the "rename dataset" actions or a kind of global "rename dataset" 
action.

J.

___________________________________________________________
Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client.  To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:

  http://lists.bx.psu.edu/

Reply via email to