<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'>Hi Laurie:<br><br>Your suggestion introduces another potential facet of SISAM and the conference. So far, we have been focused on assessment methods, but software catalogs are more about operational processes for stock assessment than methods. I think the subject of process is critically important for the initiative to improve stock assessments, but is a much larger subject than software catalogs (e.g., meeting format, peer review, frequency, scope, ...). Similar to our treatment of multispecies and ecosystem models, it is a critical topic, but I would not want assessment process issues to eclipse our main objective of improving stock assessment methods.<br><br>I think the larger question is: should we devote some of our time (e.g., one session in the conference) to operational process issues?<br><br>Feedback Welcome.<br><br>Cheers,<br>Steve<br><br><hr id="zwchr"><div style="color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;"><b>From: </b>"Laurie Kell" <laurie.kell@iccat.int><br><b>To: </b>"Steve Cadrin" <scadrin@umassd.edu>, "Mark dickeycollas" <Mark.dickeycollas@wur.nl>, "Jose De Oliveira (Cefas)" <jose.deoliveira@cefas.co.uk>, "Iago Mosqueira" <iago.mosqueira@gmail.com>, "Ernesto Jardim" <ernesto@ipimar.pt>, "Richard Methot" <Richard.Methot@noaa.gov>, "Greg Donovan" <gdonovan@iwcoffice.org>, Users@admb-project.org, "Arni Magnusson" <arnima@hafro.is>, "Jon Schnute" <Jon.Schnute@dfo-mpo.gc.ca><br><b>Sent: </b>Friday, April 20, 2012 8:05:09 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>Software Methods<br><br>In ICCAT we have a software catalogue, which requires certain criteria <br>to be fulfilled, if software are to be used in stock assessment.<br><br>I would like those criteria to be reviewed so that we follow best <br>practice. I know that software validation is a complex issue but would <br>like to ensure consistency and exchange of methods between <br>organisations. For example if a method is in the NOAA Toolbox or is on <br>the R CRAN repository shouldn´t we be able to use it in ICCAT.<br><br>This will not take long (hopefully). All I am looking for is a quick <br>review of our criteria and any appropriate criteria used elsewhere, that <br>we would need to include if our software is to be used by others. Also <br>suggestions of how to harmonise software validation in the future so <br>that we can strengthen the support for stock assessment experts and <br>develop an improved network of stock assessment developers. I would also <br>like to suggest that a global repository of all stock assessment methods <br>would be useful.<br><br><br>-- <br>Laurence Kell<br><br>ICCAT Secretariat<br>Population Dynamics Expert<br>C/ Corazón de María, 8 - 6º<br>28002 Madrid. Spain<br>Tel: (00 34) 91 4165600<br>Fax: (00 34) 91 5103710<br></div><br></div></body></html>