[cellml-discussion] a detailed curation specification

[David Nickerson]

> Just one comment here. That is, if you look at the level 2 curation
> requirements, the only one that isn't satisfied by most of the models
> I've given two stars is the unit checking. So what this means is that we
> have a bunch of models which are much better curated than the level 1
> curated models, but there isn't any way to actually show that if we
> aren't going to let them be level two. This is related to your point
> about splitting up the curation levels, and there are many models which
> would require actually reformulating the model completely to get units
> consistency (which would probably require the author getting involved.)
> 
> If we did move units consistency up to level three, I think it would
> make things more straight forward.

Rather than moving units consistency up to level 3 it would probably be 
better to move what is currently level 3 up to 4 and make level 3 all 
about units consistency.

> I think for the time being I'm going to take a left-wing approach and
> spend more time fixing the models that are completely broken.

which I think is the right thing to be doing, I just think we need to be 
careful that the status advertised for a given model matches the 
definition of that status.


David.

-- 
David Nickerson, PhD
Research Fellow
Division of Bioengineering
Faculty of Engineering
National University of Singapore
Email: david.nickerson at nus.edu.sg