Interagency Data Stewardship/LifeCycle/Preservation Forum/TeleconNotes/2011-08-10
From Federation of Earth Science Information Partners
< Interagency Data Stewardship/LifeCycle/Preservation Forum | TeleconNotes
Revision as of 16:44, 13 September 2011 by Roglesby
ESIP Preservation and Stewardship Cluster Monthly Telecon 2011-08-10
Present: Ruth Duerr, Curt Tilmes, Regina Oglesby, Brent Maddux, Erin Robinson, John, Rama, Bob Downs, Greg Janee, John Moses, Hook Hua, Mark Parsons, Bruce Barkstrom
Citations (Draft Data Citation Guidelines)
- Citations guidelines comments circulating on ESIP listserv.
- Discussed meeting at Berkley hosted by National Academy (Board on Research Data and Information) led by Paul Ueller. The board was tasked to establish a steering committee on data citation standards scheduled to occur at the end of the month.
- Mark will be speaking on ESIP guidelines and will highlight identifiers and substance used concepts. He’ll also participate in a panel discussion.
- Data citation is receiving a higher profile. Preservation and Stewardship cluster will be representing the earth science committee. Mark to email the group to remind them of the meeting.
- Need to discuss in more details strategies for engaging editors (e.g., Kathy Fontaine) to edit special issue in future
- “Tiger team” or possible “stakeholder’s working group.” Could be left to ESIP working group but there will be many discussions left to decide this. DOI’s are popular and accepted as the most useful identifiers. Curt said a peer-reviewed journal article (“On the utility of identification schemes for digital earth science data: an assessment and recommendations,” Duerr et. al.) has been produced to back this up (link to paper http://www.springerlink.com/content/52760gq3h200gw38/). Using DOI’s is not a firm recommendation, but for now, is the best thing to use is the group consensus. Mark said that “some citation is better than no citation…” This will be discussed more in future and Mark will review John’s rationale statement.
Provenance and Context Content Standard (PCCS)
- Issues brought up at summer meeting/Rama – There’s a push in NASA to have some sort of requirement posted. Need to have a process to deal with NASA while at the same time moving it to a broader level. Need to have a smaller group of people look at the material in more detail and provide feedback, possibly volunteers but no one has volunteered at this time so will probably have to ask people individually. Someone suggested it could be called a “specification” and later a standard. John referred to it as a set of requirements (instead of standards). Hook said more people need to get on board sooner regarding the development of this standard. Hook and Ruth volunteered to help Rama.
Use Cases – Curt
- Need to do more work on use cases. Looked at WC3 provenance incubator as they’re doing something similar (www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/Provenance_Dimensions)
- Discuss next steps to elaborate use cases. John agreed that a smaller working group would be good to develop a use case (builds off PCCS).
- Rama suggested that if use cases were posted to the wiki, people should take the time to work up a matrix off-line and then have a telecon. People can look at use cases, elaborate, and put on the wiki for discussion and this will be discussed at next month’s telecon.