A very quick survey to add excitement to either your holiday or work-day! None of these sucker links, where there appears a 0.24% complete progress bar on the second page, it's just a simple yes/no question on whether it's a good idea to add CAS registry numbers to ChEMBL and/or UniChem. No promises that we could deliver this, but depending on what you vote for, we will consider our options.
Update: Given the multiple channels out there, there are also comments on this on LinkedIn (in the ChUG - "ChEMBL User Group" group - why not join, if you're not already) and a couple on Google+.
Update 2: I'll let the poll run till the end of the week (Friday 8th 2014) - and then write something up on the results.
Comments
There is a formal limit of 10K, if you sign (or your organisation, with relevant scope of the license).
I'm of mixed view myself as to whether it is worth doing something with ChEMBL - hence to poll - see what the community thinks. For some of the stuff I'm currently working on (clinical candidate disclosures) they are required, and I have never seen a statement to say I can't reuse them in any document I've come across). The whole idea is that they (CAS RNs) are useful to cross reference chemical (and biological) objects with systems that choose to use them.
Sorry for briefish reply, holiday, and just back from the beach with wet trunks!
There is a formal limit of 10K, if you sign (or your organisation, with relevant scope of the license).
I'm of mixed view myself as to whether it is worth doing something with ChEMBL - hence to poll - see what the community thinks. For some of the stuff I'm currently working on (clinical candidate disclosures) they are required, and I have never seen a statement to say I can't reuse them in any document I've come across). The whole idea is that they (CAS RNs) are useful to cross reference chemical (and biological) objects with systems that choose to use them.
Sorry for briefish reply, holiday, and just back from the beach with wet trunks!