Current deposition features

Auto-completion

Yes, absolutely improtant.

Clear indication of incomplete sections

NO: All the statistics should be harvested at the time of upload. The harvest tool (pdb_extract) should be embedded as first step to extract all the values including phases and refinement log file.

Upload → Extract (harvest tool) → Populate valuesAfter above steps, then the interface can show completeness (should be all green if above process is implemented).

Clear indication of incomplete fields

Upload → Extract (harvest tool) → Populate valuesMost of the values should be in. It would only be red if harvest tool fails to extract some data for some format reason.

Live preview of deposition

Yes, but suggest to be in a report form instead of format specific.

Data harvested automatically from files that are uploaded

http://www.domain.org/pdb/future_deposition_system?param=QovCsvhNv04DkRW4SMO3Ipy8FMFS2TSPXWLUBGXNtNZJYQEgGTOsHNCk96bn8DKfdcVj1CXiLIQ%3D

Encrypted URLs

Regular expression patterns used to validate fields

Excellent.

Duplication of completed sections to minimize manual input of data

Not sure why duplication would apply to heterogens. This function would be very useful for author's information: contact info, author names in both entry and citation list.

Database lookup of certain data for improved auto-completion

Good idea. But can author edit this field if the database information is not what is in the file?

Password protection of deposition

Absolutely. We need to think about the group privilege. If a student who knows the pwd has left, do we allow the same group to reset pwd?

Validation of data between fields on the same page and also between fields that appear in different sections.

Yes. Also needs to check across the file- resolution high in both refinement and data collection for both overall and highest shell.

Validation of deposition prior to submission

Should be part of deposition system (integrated).In addition have stone alone validation for dep preparation.

Validation prior to submission

Validation (serious errors)

What are considered as serious errors? Need to lay out more.

Validation summary

Aren't we going to use Task Force recommended one?

Feedback of curation issues and data to depositor in the same interface

(Processed files and reports)

Needs to add download for mmCIF fileSuggest to add:

1. Issues to be addressed 2. Summary report in the above links

I assume we will incorporate new validation from Task Force.

PISA not PQS?

Suggest to have Asym unit image side by side with BU fpr comparison

Seq Cross Ref