Difference between revisions of "DisasterLifecycle telecon 2017-02-09"
(Created page with " < Back to the Disasters Homepage<br> '''Disaster Cluster Telecon Notes: Feb 9, 2017''' In attendance: Brian Wee, Karen Moe, Ken Keiser, Greg Yetman, Maggi Gla...") |
|||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
OGC testbed call info [http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/requests/154 HERE] | OGC testbed call info [http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/requests/154 HERE] | ||
| − | Potential follow up on Trusted Data with Information Quality Cluster (after participation in their session at the Winter meeting) <br> | + | '''Potential follow up on Trusted Data with Information Quality Cluster (after participation in their session at the Winter meeting)''' <br> |
Outcome of 3DM for us to look at a community-recognized data products (Erin) <br> | Outcome of 3DM for us to look at a community-recognized data products (Erin) <br> | ||
Emphasis on low-latency but also need for continuing research data product with longer latency (and potentially historical data) (Ken) <br> | Emphasis on low-latency but also need for continuing research data product with longer latency (and potentially historical data) (Ken) <br> | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
Look at re3data.org (registry for research data repositories) to see what we can use to build on in terms of “certifications” for trusted data on the level of repositories (and not datasets itself). <br> | Look at re3data.org (registry for research data repositories) to see what we can use to build on in terms of “certifications” for trusted data on the level of repositories (and not datasets itself). <br> | ||
Importance of workflow for using ‘trusted data’ <br> | Importance of workflow for using ‘trusted data’ <br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Data-Driven Decision Making workshop #2 held in late January''' <br> | ||
| + | * Dependencies between utilities and other critical sectors: this was mentioned during the meeting. Food for thought about how ESIP might be relevant to related critical infrastructure sectors. The diagram below (not shown at the meeting) is from the Department of Energy’s Quadrennial Energy Review (January 2017, Figure S-2): | ||
Revision as of 16:13, February 17, 2017
< Back to the Disasters Homepage
Disaster Cluster Telecon Notes: Feb 9, 2017
In attendance: Brian Wee, Karen Moe, Ken Keiser, Greg Yetman, Maggi Glasscoe, Bruce Caron, Erin Robinson, Sean Barberie, Stephan Klene, Bob Chen,
Disasters Lifecycle Telecon 2017-02-09
Agenda topics:
Comments from our successful sessions at the 2017 ESIP Winter meeting in January 2017 South America exercise, NASA interest and possibly funding participation, related to GEOSS. Rapid response proposal vs open call...follow up needed OGC testbed call info HERE
Potential follow up on Trusted Data with Information Quality Cluster (after participation in their session at the Winter meeting)
Outcome of 3DM for us to look at a community-recognized data products (Erin)
Emphasis on low-latency but also need for continuing research data product with longer latency (and potentially historical data) (Ken)
Need to cognizant about the applications; e.g., from policy viewpoint regarding resilience for critical infrastructure is broader than disaster response (Brian) re3data.org
This could be a topic for one of the monthly calls. “Crowd source” ideas to address what is ‘trusted data’ and what features (and processes) will drive it; would we see data from ‘trusted providers’? (Sean)
Can we get input from the group on different factors that contribute to Trusted Data? E.g. Data sources, data curation process, validation and verification.
Look at re3data.org (registry for research data repositories) to see what we can use to build on in terms of “certifications” for trusted data on the level of repositories (and not datasets itself).
Importance of workflow for using ‘trusted data’
Data-Driven Decision Making workshop #2 held in late January
- Dependencies between utilities and other critical sectors: this was mentioned during the meeting. Food for thought about how ESIP might be relevant to related critical infrastructure sectors. The diagram below (not shown at the meeting) is from the Department of Energy’s Quadrennial Energy Review (January 2017, Figure S-2):
