> The calls for research to be transparent and reproducible have never been louder. But today's tools for reproducible research can be intimidating - especially if you're not a coder.<p>As someone (a software engineer) who has been trying (struggling) to reproduce biology research lately, I say amen. Hallelujah.<p>But. It's time to accept coding as a core skill. Science has more to learn from software engineering than it realizes. Software engineering (aka coding) eats reproducibility for breakfast, even when hundreds or thousands of "collaborators" are involved. These days, it's rare for a single biology researcher to produce (publish) code that is easily reproducible by an external researcher.
This looks interesting. I'm actually rather surprised at the lack of quality in most open source 'office' alternatives. I'm not sure why, but open/libreoffice is almost unusable for heavy duty office work. Microsoft products are the clear winners if you require productivity and stability. I really hope that changes soon, because I feel it's a major factor that holds back widespread Linux adoption.
Not sure why that page does not include a link (that I can find anyway) to this intro video that the creator, Michael Aufreiter, put together:<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzrR96PDnO8" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzrR96PDnO8</a>
Interresting!<p>Does Stencilla offer any kind of author collaboration? Publication are usually not one person efforts and research teams oftentimes are not working in the same location.<p>In my experience the GDocs or Word comments and revise mode are heavily used in collaborations.
tl;dr - an interactive notebook, that accepts Jupyter files, for folks who usually use MS Office.<p>From their FAQ:<p>> Stencila allows you collaborate with colleagues who use other tools than RMarkdown and Jupyter Notebook, without you having to give up your favourite tool. Stencila Coverters make it possible to open documents in various formats (R Markdown - Rmd, Jupyter Notebook - ipynb and so on) in Stencila. The conversion is lossless for all interactive parts (such as code cells).<p>Nice to see dat part of the conversation.
How's stencila supposed to produce reproducible research?<p>No one's fudging the formulae, they're fudging data. And stencila will digest whatever data you give it, real or fake
Has anyone else noticed this trend of integrating data science tools into one package that installs and potentially monitors you? For example this seems like another `Anaconda Navigator` clone. Or am I missing something here?
I'm surprised that there appears to be no link to the Github Repo on the homepage: <a href="https://github.com/stencila/stencila" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/stencila/stencila</a>
If any contributor sees this: The "Learn" link in the footer points to a 404 Github page.<p>Is this usable for daily usage? And can we output PDF and use LaTeX for publications?
So this is a reproducible research application suite built on Node.JS, the epitome of non-reproducibility and characterised by fast pace, little care for compatibility, and an ecosystem of volatile libraries?