3 ms·
You don't understand the problem. Read the article.
by psychometry 6y ago
You don't understand the problem. Read the article.
- proactivesvcs 6y agoI read the article and parent is correct in part. However, equally the article touches on the fact that many people may use a spreadsheet and not all will be correctly trained to use their complex tools properly, in order to ensure data integrity. I consider this a failing not in software or Excel, but in education and professional standards. Scientists can be expected to understand and use their tools correctly, since not doing so will taint their data.
- conductr 6y agoIs the simple renaming of 27 genes a good solve? I think it is. Any time you expect people to be trained, you’re planning for failure. Even a trained person can make a mistake or forget to do the manual steps. This eliminates the possibility.
- proactivesvcs 6y agoI think it's the pragmatic approach, yes. I'm disappointed that the article (and so many of the comments here) are not addressing the root cause. The worst part is that not all of the people using it need to be trained - data validity enforcement ought to solve this outright.
- jaclaz 6y ago>You don't understand the problem. Read the article. Maybe I don't understand the problem, but I did read the article. Care to explain what I don't understand? > so when a user inputs a gene’s alphanumeric symbol into a spreadsheet, like MARCH1 — short for “Membrane Associated Ring-CH-Type Finger 1” — Excel converts that into a date: 1-Mar. I can assure you that if you prepend what you type with a single quote, or an apex or a double quote, what you type will be interpreted a text in Excel, respectively left, center and right aligned. Even a number, i.e. "45 will result in 45(right aligned), and a small green triangle in top left corner and if you hover on it with the mouse it will pop-up something to the effect of "number formatted as text".