You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
A space exists between checklists of knowledge and deep dives on data management. We want to fill that space for biologists specifically.
The best practices paper is analogous to the notes you might give a naive field researcher before you send them into the field. Enough to help them avoid doing things that will cause headaches down the line.
However, in the intro, we can emphasize that becoming a savvy data manager isn't about fulfilling a checklist, but developing a toolbox and intuition that is flexible and will ensure "good enough practices". To this end, we should include a short list of further reading in the intro, encouraging the reader to do a deep dive into this literature within x months of when they needed to lean on the best practices.
Finally, one of the consistent drawbacks to other guides, like the "good enough practices" paper, is that there is no mechanism for feedback and iteration as our ideas and tools evolve. We aim to solicit and include this feedback as part of the product, in the same way the GBIF has done with their literature.
Maybe we rename this from best practices to "practical practices" or something else, to make a point like the "good enough practices" folks did about the "best practices" paper that preceded theirs.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
What section of the best practices does your suggestion relate to?
Introduction
Short description of content that should be revised
This is still in a draft phase and needs a lot of work.
Suggested revision
However, in the intro, we can emphasize that becoming a savvy data manager isn't about fulfilling a checklist, but developing a toolbox and intuition that is flexible and will ensure "good enough practices". To this end, we should include a short list of further reading in the intro, encouraging the reader to do a deep dive into this literature within x months of when they needed to lean on the best practices.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: