Like the NCBC 'Required Resource Description Fields' (http://www.loni.ucla.edu/twiki/bin/view/...) NITRC has the following descriptions for all listed resources:

* Name, txt, single line
* Description, txt, multiline
* URL, txt
* Stage, typed list (Development status in NITRC)
* Keywords, from a fixed vocabulary, with other
* License, typed list, with other

Other elements in the NCBC Required fields include

* Organization

for which NITRC does not yet have an official capture point for, and

* Resource Ontology Label
* Type of Resource, typed list

which are both similar to the fixed vocabulary top level selections, so, by definition, keyword selection in NITRC captures this descriptor.

NITRC, also captures the following essential categories of information per tool, that might be considered part of the 'minimal' description:

* Intended Audience, fixed list,
* Natural Language, fixed list
* Operating System, fixed list
* Programming language, fixed list
* Data Formats, fixed list
* Resource contact person, registered NITRC user

So, how do we proceed from here on this topic? Apart from clarifying some keyword/descriptor issues (items 2 & 3 from above), it looks like the NITRC description is mostly compliant w/ the NCBC minimal description. Should any of the NITRC extra essential descriptor be 'promoted' to NCBC minimal? I would argue FOR inclusion of data formats, Operating System and programming language; and would 'go with the flow' on the others... It's always OK for a specific site to require more than the minimal, as long as the minimal is covered.