Dear colleagues,
the ongoing discussion has shown the following interests:
1. readiness to *further* develop the FCS3.0 standard
2. *localisation* of the general discussion in this E-mail box
because of the importance of this issue
3. *transcripts* and *specifics* in the ISAC discussion forum with
mutual references (links)
Re: to Jim Houston (jim.houston@stjude.org)
It is *not* the goal of the present effort "to meet specific clinical
needs"
but rather to greatly *simplify* cytometer independent list mode processing
(CILP) in general.
By analogy: most of us would e.g. agree that a major advantage
of CD-ROMs is their *general* readibility. This was never achieved for
floppy, magneto optical or hard disks as well as tapes etc. due to a
*lack* of general standardisation. Therefore good standardization,
is not fun for exotic people, but of a *centrally vital* concern to
many of us in cytometry.
The "backyard flow persons who dabble at programming" should
definitively belong to the past because *any* usual flow cytometry program
should read *any* files written according to an improved FCS standard.
Future Development:
The ever increasing complexity in conjunction with altered health care
management worldwide will e.g. result in a telemedicine facette of
multiparameter cytometry. *Telecytometry*, like telepathology will
become quite common i.e. measurements will be made in one institution
according to certain standards but expert reference centers will establish
the diagnosis following remote list mode processing. CILP is therefore
an absolute *must* for data processing within distributed laboratory networks.
The idea that only *hospital* laboratories are affected is erroneous if one
thinks of standardized data classification in environmental, industrial but
also in general research laboratories.
Best regards
G.Valet
E-mail: valet@biochem.mpg.de
Internet: http://www.biochem.mpg.de/valet/cellbio.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 11:49:57 EST