canSAS - User contributions [en]

Facilities Representatives Discussion Group

2007-12-08T03:22:46Z

129.6.123.73:

===Participants===
* Peter Boesecke (ESRF)
* Paul Butler (NIST)
* Daniel Clemens (Germany)
* Charles Dewhurst (ILL)
* Eliott Gilbert (ANSTO)
* Rex Hjelm (LANSCE)
* Pete Jemian (APS)
* Steve King (ISIS)
* Ken Littrell (ORNL)
* Adrian Rennie (Users)
* Nick Terrill (Diamond)
===News/Status===

* After the workshop, it became clear that not only were there a significant number of facilities from the meeting who wanted to participate, but quite a number of facilities that were unable to attend were mentioned as important to have particpate. This raises the question of how best to proceed. A tele/video conference with that many nodes and people is not likely to be productive, yet reducing representation seems to defeat the purpose of the group. Some suggestions so far are:
** divide into subgroups of no more than 6 or 7 (probably high for a vido link and a bit high for real discussions). This would require some kind of uber group to facilitate the communication between groups. Two possiblities are:
*** Make up of groups is set radomly. Each group would then presumably choose a representative to the uber group. Advantage is the encouragement of cross region fertilization. Disadvantage is that regional groups might be useful in themselves for discussion of purely regional issues.
*** Regional groups are formed with the uber group having a representative from each of the regional groups
** Keep one large group but have presentation led disucussions to stimulate discussion. This would require much more off line effort and still not allow quite the same kind of rapid development of ideas and issues, but would keep everyone together.
*Paul Butler will need to contact the current members and discuss the best way to proceed. This may involve a teleconference of the current particpants. This item will be taken up in early January

[[Category:Working Groups]]

Facilities Representatives Discussion Group

2007-12-08T03:16:50Z

129.6.123.73:

===Participants===
* Peter Boesecke (ESRF)
* Paul Butler (NIST)
* Daniel Clemens (Germany)
* Charles Dewhurst (ILL)
* Eliott Gilbert (ANSTO)
* Rex Hjelm (LANSCE)
* Pete Jemian (APS)
* Steve King (ISIS)
* Ken Littrell (ORNL)
* Adrian Rennie (Users)
* Nick Terrill (Diamond)
===News/Status===

After the workshop, it became clear that not only were there a significant number of facilities from the meeting who wanted to participate, but quite a number of facilities that were unable to attend were mentioned as important to have particpate. This raises the question of how best to proceed. A tele/video conference with that many nodes and people is not likely to be productive, yet reducing representation seems to defeat the purpose of the group. Some suggestions so far are:
* divide into subgroups of no more than 6 or 7 (probably high for a vido link and a bit high for real discussions). This would require some kind of uber group to facilitate the communication between groups. Two possiblities are:
** Make up of groups is set radomly.
** Regional groups are formed with the uber group having a representative from each of the regional groups
* Keep one large group but have presentation led disucussions to stimulate discussion. This would require much more off line effort and still not allow quite the same kind of rapid development of ideas and issues, but would keep everyone together.

[[Category:Working Groups]]

Facilities Representatives Discussion Group

2007-12-08T03:15:44Z

129.6.123.73:

===Participants===
* Peter Boesecke (ESRF)
* Paul Butler (NIST)
* Daniel Clemens (Germany)
* Charles Dewhurst (ILL)
* Eliott Gilbert (ANSTO)
* Rex Hjelm (LANSCE)
* Pete Jemian (APS)
* Steve King (ISIS)
* Ken Littrell (ORNL)
* Adrian Rennie (Users)
* Nick Terrill (Diamond)
===News/Status===

After the workshop, it became clear that not only were there a significant number of facilities from the meeting who wanted to participate, but quite a number of facilities that were unable to attend were mentioned as important to have particpate. This raises the question of how best to proceed. A tele/video conference with that many nodes and people is not likely to be productive, yet reducing representation seems to defeat the purpose of the group. Some suggestions so far are:
* divide into subgroups of no more than 6 or 7 (probably high for a vido link and a bit high for real discussions). This would require some kind of uber group to facilitate the communication between groups. Two possiblities could be as given below.
** Make up of groups is set radomly.
** Regional groups are formed with the uber group having a representative from each of the regional groups
* Keep one large group but have presentation led disucussions to stimulate discussion. This would require much more off line effort and still not allow quite the same kind of rapid development of ideas and issues, but would keep everyone together.

[[Category:Working Groups]]

Facilities Representatives Discussion Group

2007-12-08T03:14:55Z

129.6.123.73:

===Participants===
* Peter Boesecke (ESRF)
* Paul Butler (NIST)
* Daniel Clemens (Germany)
* Charles Dewhurst (ILL)
* Eliott Gilbert (ANSTO)
* Rex Hjelm (LANSCE)
* Pete Jemian (APS)
* Steve King (ISIS)
* Ken Littrell (ORNL)
* Adrian Rennie (Users)
* Nick Terrill (Diamond)
===News/Status===

After the workshop, it became clear that not only were there a significant number of facilities from the meeting who wanted to participate, but quite a number of facilities that were unable to attend were mentioned as important to have particpate. This raises the question of how best to proceed. A tele/video conference with that many nodes and people is not likely to be productive, yet reducing representation seems to defeat the purpose of the group. Some suggestions so far are:
* divide into subgroups of no more than 6 or 7 (probably high for a vido link and a bit high for real discussions). This would require some kind of uber group to facilitate the communication between groups. Two ways to do this<nowiki>:</nowiki>
** Make up of groups is set radomly.
** Regional groups are formed with the uber group having a representative from each of the regional groups
* Keep one large group but have presentation led disucussions to stimulate discussion. This would require much more off line effort and still not allow quite the same kind of rapid development of ideas and issues, but would keep everyone together.

[[Category:Working Groups]]

Facilities Representatives Discussion Group

2007-12-08T03:14:20Z

129.6.123.73:

===Participants===
* Peter Boesecke (ESRF)
* Paul Butler (NIST)
* Daniel Clemens (Germany)
* Charles Dewhurst (ILL)
* Eliott Gilbert (ANSTO)
* Rex Hjelm (LANSCE)
* Pete Jemian (APS)
* Steve King (ISIS)
* Ken Littrell (ORNL)
* Adrian Rennie (Users)
* Nick Terrill (Diamond)
===News/Status===

After the workshop, it became clear that not only were there a significant number of facilities from the meeting who wanted to participate, but quite a number of facilities that were unable to attend were mentioned as important to have particpate. This raises the question of how best to proceed. A tele/video conference with that many nodes and people is not likely to be productive, yet reducing representation seems to defeat the purpose of the group. Some suggestions so far are:
* divide into subgroups of no more than 6 or 7 (probably high for a vido link and a bit high for real discussions). This would require some kind of uber group to facilitate the communication between groups. Two ways to do this:
** Make up of groups is set radomly.
** Regional groups are formed with the uber group having a representative from each of the regional groups
* Keep one large group but have presentation led disucussions to stimulate discussion. This would require much more off line effort and still not allow quite the same kind of rapid development of ideas and issues, but would keep everyone together.

[[Category:Working Groups]]

Facilities Representatives Discussion Group

2007-12-08T03:11:39Z

129.6.123.73:

===Participants===
* Peter Boesecke (ESRF)
* Paul Butler (NIST)
* Daniel Clemens (Germany)
* Charles Dewhurst (ILL)
* Eliott Gilbert (ANSTO)
* Rex Hjelm (LANSCE)
* Pete Jemian (APS)
* Steve King (ISIS)
* Ken Littrell (ORNL)
* Adrian Rennie (Users)
* Nick Terrill (Diamond)
===News/Status===

After the workshop, it became clear that not only were there a significant number of facilities from the meeting who wanted to participate, but quite a number of facilities that were unable to attend were mentioned as important to have particpate. This raises the question of how best to proceed. A tele/video conference with that many nodes and people is not likely to be productive, yet reducing representation seems to defeat the purpose of the group. Some suggestions so far are:
* divide into subgroups of no more than 6 or 7 (probably high for a vido link and a bit high for real discussions). This would require some kind of uber group to facilitate the communication between groups. Two ways to do this:
** Make up of groups is set radomly.
** Regional groups are formed with the uber group having a representative from each of the regional groups
* Keep one large group but have presentation led disucussions to stimulate discussion. This would require much more off line effort and still not allow quite the same kind of rapid development of ideas and issues, but would keep everyone together.
== Headline text ==

[[Category:Working Groups]]

Facilities Representatives Discussion Group

2007-12-08T03:01:11Z

129.6.123.73:

canSAS Working Groups

2007-12-07T18:55:47Z

129.6.123.73:

Welcome to the canSAS Working Groups wiki.

This site is to allow the members of the various canSAS Working Groups to share and record information about their group's progress.

The report from the canSAS-V workshop ([http://www.smallangles.net/canSAS/canSASVReportFinal.pdf PDF available here]) describes the terms of reference for the working groups. A summary and links to the wiki pages are below.

===Facilities Representatives Discussion Group===
The intention is that this be a group that meets by tele- or video-conference two to four times a year to discuss cross-facility issues and to develop co-operation.

[[Facilities Representatives Discussion Group | Group Wiki Page]]

===1D Data Formats===
Based on the proposal of Steve King and Ron Ghosh, this group will develop a common 1D Reduced Data format in XML.

[[1D Data Formats Working Group | Group Wiki Page]]

===IGOR Pro Developers===
A number of SAS software packages are developed using IGOR Pro and this group is intended to agree common coding standards to make sharing of code easier and reduce the problems of having multiple packages, with potentially similar functions, loaded simultaneously into IGOR.

[[IGOR Pro Developers Working Group| Group Wiki Page]]

===Standardization===
This group will develop a suite of SAS standardization methods, arrange for facilities to use them and report on the status of each tested instrument.

[[Standardization Working Group | Group Wiki Page]]

===Global SAS Web Portal===
This group will develop a web portal based on the one at [http://www.small-angle.ac.uk www.small-angle.ac.uk] to act as a "one-stop-shop" for all things SAS.

[[Global SAS Portal Working Group | Group Wiki Page]]

----
Please direct any questions about this site to [mailto:ajj@nist.gov Andrew Jackson]