Specification Updates, Jan 13, 2021
The following features will be added to the spec on the Home page:
#10. In addition to collecting EDI data from the potential participants who indicate their interest in attending, the data must be collected in an anonymized way, but associated with the proposal. It should be made clear to the user that the information will not be directly associated to their identity, but is collected for statistical purposes. These statistics should be available to the organizers of the proposal, as well as staff and review committees.
#10.5 Some of the fields on the proposal submission form concern the subject matter of the proposal. Submitters will be asked to choose the AMS Subject Classification that their proposal falls under. They are given a primary subject, a secondary subject, and a third, "BIRS Subject", which is our local list of subjects that change often.
BIRS also maintains a list of experts that it calls upon to do proposal reviews. Each "Reviewer" should have subject areas associated to them.
After the submitter has selected their subjects, they should be asked to select which reviewers, from a list of proposal reviewers who's subject areas match the selected subject areas of the proposal, would be a good fit for reviewing the proposal. Additionally, the proposal submitter should be able to mark any potential reviewers as "not applicable" for reviewing this proposal. This could be due to conflict of interest, or some other reason. (Nice to have feature: allow them to attach a note to explain why they marked certain reviewers as "not applicable"). There will be further discussion of the "applicability" of reviewers in the Proposal Reviews section, #...
