BCM Sequence Annotation Web Server

allera at mailer.meb.uni-bonn.de allera at mailer.meb.uni-bonn.de
Mon Sep 12 10:49:53 EST 1994


In article <CvJ1B6.Hxq at ncifcrf.gov> toms at fcsparc6.ncifcrf.gov (Tom Schneider) writes:
>In article <RSMITH.94Aug31204529 at dot.bcm.tmc.edu> rsmith at dot.bcm.tmc.edu
>(Randall Smith) writes:
>
>| :    Announcing a new WWW Server: The BCM Sequence Annotation Server
>| : URL:  http://dot.imgen.bcm.tmc.edu:9331/seq-annot/home.html
>
>This idea has both good and bad points and I think that they should be
>considered extremely carefully.
>
>First, the idea that individual researchers should be able to update a database
>directly is wonderful.  If everybody were to do that to the data they are
>experts on, GenBank would quickly become a clean database.
>
>However, there are several problems:
>
>1. Corruption of the data either intentionally or inadvertently.  The authors
>already are aware of this possibility.
>
>2. Inconsistency between researchers.  The NCBI attempts to make entries
>uniform by certain standards, but individual researchers cannot know what these
>are in detail.  The only solutions I see are to force the kinds of annotations
>to follow certain forms or to pass all the changes to experts for editing.  The
>trouble with passing the data to experts is that the number of experts has to
>grow exponentially along with the growth of the database.  Maybe we just have
>to accept that to avoid a worse mess!
>
>2.  Do the data flow into GenBank?  There is no indication that it will.  This
>means that if GenBank makes a correction it won't go into this database and
>vice versa.  Since the data are not maintained in one place, it is duplicated
>and will eventually become inconsistent.  Who should or will a researcher
>believe?  A randomly annotated database or the "official" one?  How will
>inconsistencies be resolved?
>
>I see this as an experiment.  Once the experiment has been shown to work
>reasonably well, all the data should be passed to NCBI for careful processing
>along with all new data.  That is, the server should be run by NCBI or closely
>in conjunction with them.
>
>For my reasoning behind this posting, see the philosophy paper available from:
>http://fconvx.ncifcrf.gov:2001/~toms/onlinepapers.html
>
>  Tom Schneider
>  National Cancer Institute
>  Laboratory of Mathematical Biology
>  Frederick, Maryland  21702-1201
>  toms at ncifcrf.gov



More information about the Embl-db mailing list