Agenda

1. Updates from Kris, Adam
   1. Kris: question about annotations extending to descendents
2. Making tool more accessible to users
   1. better server (requested from U of A)
   2. ability to upload trees and annotations (for example, request from Big Trees group)
   3. link to server and code from wiki (or iplantcollaborative.org)

Notes

1. Kris gave demo on new features:
   1. ability to select individual nodes, subtrees, MRCA, a drag-a-box selection for multiple nodes, etc. Some discussion about UI design. How to document features for users? Should the user pick a selection type (node, subtree, etc) and then annotate the selection or select a node and then choose an annotation method (subtree, node, etc). Questions should be posed to wider audience for feedback.
   2. export to svg almost done; still some issues with text labels to resolve
2. Discussion about increased usability / visibility
   1. Ability to upload tree means that tree gets added to our database. How long should it live there? It will be publicly available, is that ok?
   2. Don't want this group to deal with programming for user accounts, expiring trees in DB, etc (things that will eventually be re-invented by Core)
   3. Initial target community of tree-providers should be other iptol members
   4. Simplest initial solution is to provide an link to email tree file, with justification. Email would go to Adam / Karen / Kris, who would contact owner and then upload. Clunky, but works.
   5. after the meeting, Adam suggested this as a medium term solution: We can use iPlant's cloud platform (Atmosphere) to create virtual machine instances on demand. We a user wants to view a tree, we load up a virtual machine just for them. They can then upload their tree. When they are done, the virtual machine can be shutdown and the data with it. Atmosphere already uses iPlant authentication mechanism, so we don't need to worry about redoing that. There are a lot of details to work out, but it might be good to discuss this more
   6. GSoC: two potential projects that would involve viz code on NESCent project page. This would also increase exposure of projects to wider community.
   7. Source code: current source is on github under personal accounts of Adam and Kris. How do we show that this is an iPlant resource?
3. Naim has feedback (both positive and negative from TR project). About 9 of the issues are relevant for viz.

Action items

1. Naim to forward TR feedback to list
2. Naim to talk to Matthew Helmke about plans for public iPlant code repository (perhaps as GitHub organization?)
3. Karen to submit Vizbi abstract tomorrow, solicit feedback at meeting next week
4. Adam to check firewall, etc for new server (yay!) and see if will be available for Vizbi
5. Adam to forward instructions to Karen on how to upload trees to DB
6. Once we have new server set up, send invite to wider iptol community for demo session of new features, feedback on UI decisions