I work in a lab and also code. I was <i>just</i> thinking about implementing a prototype site with this functionality <i>this week</i>. I have coded for a while but have no coding resume, so I don't know if I qualify for your position. But here are a couple of ideas I had, if you'd like them:<p>- Create protocol versioning backed by something like Git - changes made to protocols are tracked according to the user, and it should be simple to refer to any version of the protocol (which will usually be versioned with words instead of numbers)<p>- Allow users to upload raw protocols and attempt to parse them for the key sections - maybe have an assisted parsing, where the user can edit the final interpretation<p>- Make elements as semantic as possible (for example, catalog numbers, repeatable steps, timepoints, notes/advisories)<p>- Have protocols that are "certified" as being proofread or accepted by multiple, reliable sources or contributors - especially protocols describing reagent recipes<p>- Make protocols as abstract as possible such that you can change variables (volumes, number of reads, timing) at the top of the protocol, and the rest of the protocol changes accordingly<p>- Allow a rough graphing option of active/inactive time during the protocol, so that the experimenter can generally gauge how to manage his time<p>- Allow automatic creation of flow charts if protocol is formatted correctly<p>I have loads of experience with the pain points of protocols in science, so I'd love to see a good, standard solution emerge in this space.