Difference between revisions of "Sustainable Data Management/20160720 ESIP summer mtg"
From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
Cynthia.parr (talk | contribs) |
Cynthia.parr (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
* List the predominant standards eg APIs, ORCID, etc. | * List the predominant standards eg APIs, ORCID, etc. | ||
* help to comment on Erin's and Shelley's flower diagram to make it better for understanding roles and their touchpoints | * help to comment on Erin's and Shelley's flower diagram to make it better for understanding roles and their touchpoints | ||
| + | * look for opportunities to streamline the landscape and fulfill the needs of different perspectives | ||
Revision as of 13:21, July 20, 2016
- ESIP summer meeting
- landscape: http://commons.esipfed.org/node/9139
Agenda
Abstract and uploaded talks: http://commons.esipfed.org/node/9139
Speakers, from 3 points of view (<10 min each):
- Kerstin Lehnert - Repository Registries (COPDESS-Re3Data)
- Matt Jones - Repositories aggregators (Data ONE)
- Margaret O'Brien - Contributors (liaison, perspective from Researchers)
- Also to discuss, Shelley Stall's visualization at ...link...
For each talk and following, we are discussing the following questions.
- How open are each of these repositories to new or outside data?
- What will it take so can we get more data in repositories?
- How to guide people to the right repository?
- Additional fields to add to the registry to help? E.g. Certifications. (http://gfzpublic.gfz-potsdam.de/pubman/item/escidoc:1397899:6/component/escidoc:1398549/re3data_schema_documentation_v3_0.pdf)
- Any obvious gaps in services that we know of?
Attending
Notes
Outcomes of today's discussions
Recommendations for registries
- send out reminder to update the registry record regularly
- promote the business card standard
- work to standardize the APIs that journals use to communicate with repositories
- consider opening up correction process to anybody with confirmation by recordholder
- note that some metadata about a repository may live in different registries (e.g. COPDESS doesn't have info about technical services but Council for Data Federation might and so does DataONE -- so registries should ensure linkage across the relevant records
Recommendations for repositories
- take an active role in bringing COPDESS messages to your institution
- create a standards compliant business card
- use re3data as the authoritative source
- validate your record in COPDESS (where you can own your record)
- adopt an existing API rather than developing one of your own
- use loose coupling so submission or authentication systems or other subsystems could be used across groups
- start with small steps to participate in an aggregated network, incrementally improve
- leverage added value from aggregators for things like data citation
Recommendations for liaisons
- develop a set of questions to help narrow the list of options based on Margaret's questions
- hope for consolidation to streamline the options in the longer term
- help registries to track the right kind of info
Next steps for landscape analysis
- will need to get metadata from re3data & COPDESS and CDF?
- List the predominant standards eg APIs, ORCID, etc.
- help to comment on Erin's and Shelley's flower diagram to make it better for understanding roles and their touchpoints
- look for opportunities to streamline the landscape and fulfill the needs of different perspectives
