[seqfan] Re: sequence warnings?

[Maximilian Hasler]

I suggest that sequences which are "doubtful" (say, kw "uned" which
should also be attributed to those who "contain errors with high
probability")

should simply NOT be displayed when using a search without the keyword
"uned" (or some appropriate checkbox) ; maybe one could add a line at
bottom (in very small print) saying
("plus NN more results with pending edits which have been hidden
[click here to display]")

I sincerely believe that this could be implemented in less than 15 minutes.
It's enough to add that checkbox in the HTML code (half a line of
static HTML, plus a tiny snippet of code if the contents of the
checkbox are to be preserved upon the next display of the form),
and to suppress output of a seq.that would contain "uned" unless the
variable corresponding to the checkbox is set.
Optionally, when such sequences are displayed, they could have a pale
red background and some popup saying "WARNING: this sequence has yet
not been approved by an editor" when the mouse pointer is hovering
about the values or comments etc.

Regards,
Maximilian

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 8:24 AM, Christopher Gribble
<chris.eveswell at virgin.net> wrote:
> There may be a little misunderstanding here.
> I am not happy with the thought of pecking-order lists either.
>
> Chris Gribble
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu [mailto:seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu]
> On Behalf Of Alexander P-sky
> Sent: 30 September 2010 11:50 AM
> To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list
> Subject: [seqfan] Re: sequence warnings?
>
> I fully agree with Douglas McNeil  and Zak and NOT with Christopher Gribble
> and NOT with Andrew Weimholt
>
> I definitely do not like the idea of lists of the "pecking order".
>
>>We are waiting for wiki too long...
> So when wiki is coming and how democratic it will be ?
>
> Alexander R. Povolotsky
> ===========================
> On 9/30/10, Christopher Gribble <chris.eveswell at virgin.net> wrote:
>> I heartily agree.
>>
>> Chris Gribble
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu
>> [mailto:seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu]
>> On Behalf Of Andrew Weimholt
>> Sent: 30 September 2010 5:44 AM
>> To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list
>> Subject: [seqfan] Re: sequence warnings?
>>
>> On 9/29/10, zak seidov <zakseidov at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Meanwile why Ass.Eds can not discuss (NEW and old) SEQs among
>>> themselves  not bothering the whole list right now - all we need is
>>> the good will and the separate list of AE addresses, right?
>>
>> I'm not sure what the rest of the list thinks about that, but I for
>> one, enjoy being able to see all of the discussions. I believe it is
>> beneficial for non-AE members such as myself to be aware of the issues
>> and criticisms that the AEs raise regarding various submissions.
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>