Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

All,
I recently attended a workshop at NIST
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/confpage/080501.htm where the open forum
discussion centered around image metadata. The OME folks were there (amongst
others) and there was a consensus that there needs to be a formal way to
record metadata. Interesting suggestions were that each instrument in future
would contain a unique ID and this would be recorded along with images.
Unique codes embedded in images could identify "raw data". There could be a
way to record all image manipulations - at the instrument and subsequently -
by careful use of metadata. Some of the discussion was concerned with
availability of raw data for others to access and mine as new methods become
available or a new perspective was desired. There are of course many issues
surrounding this but note the way that protein structures have to be lodged
with the pdb as a condition of e.g. NIH funding.

Representatives from the microscopy community who attended also agreed that
NIST may have a role to play with the production of "best practice"
guidelines for microscopists. Whilst NIST does not have a mandate to enforce
standards it is their core business and they have a lot of experience.

Another thread to the discussion was the development of the "semantic web"
see e.g. the wiki at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web

Eventually, data mining will be web-based but it will rely entirely on
having confidence in and records of how data was produced.

I am sure there will be wider discussion over time.

Chris


Christopher J Gilpin Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Director, Molecular and Cellular Imaging Facility
K1.A04
UT Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas
5323 Harry Hines Boulevard
Dallas, TX 75390-9039
Phone +1 214 648 2827
Fax +1 214 648 6408