Interagency Data Stewardship/LifeCycle/Preservation Forum/TeleconNotes/20100414
Preservation Cluster MeetingNotes - April 14, 2010
- Identifiers paper status
- Identifiers testbed report
- Status of report on AGU townhall
- Provenance paper status
- Data management recommendations status
- Summer ESIP meeting plans
- Plans for the fall AGU meeting?
Ruth Duerr, Brian Rogan, Rob Raskin, Curt Tilmes, Rama Ramapyian, Gao Chen, Bruce Barkstrom, Bob Downs, John Scialdone, Greg Foti, Nancy Hohlenreich, Carol Meyer, James Frew, Mark Parsons
Identifiers paper status
Ruth made a first pass through the contributions, trying to cut each down to no more than 750 words. She is intending to send it out to authors by the end of the week. The goal is for a complete draft by the end of the month.
Identifiers testbed report
The testbed is still going slowly. There is more work by email rather than testing.
Status of report on AGU townhall
The report has been turned into a paper and submitted to EOS. So far there has been no response.
Provenance paper status
Curt gave an update and hopes to have something to send out very soon.
Data management recommendations status
Rama has begun work on it and has gone through the reference materials and has begun writing but he has a ways to go at this point. It is not on the wiki but will be posting it once he gets it in better shape.
Summer ESIP meeting plans
Proposing two sessions for Wednesday. Norm Loeb and Greg Leptoukh would be lined up for the first session. The other session will be a continuation of our series on National perspectives.
Sam Ultman from NOAA has been contacted by Mark Gao.
Thursday is very open. Carol was asked about a NOAA workshop that will take some time but it has not been solidified.
NASA has suggested a data workshop and a discussion on identifiers, should we carve out time for this type of workshop? This would be on guidelines for data producers. While this is a good idea, at some point data producers need to be part of the discussion. This would only have a recommendations outcome at most. There was a lot of discussion on the difficulty of addressing the topic but it was agreed that it was a good topic for discussion at the meeting.
It may be worth continuing the identifier work and if there are applications in the library community that we can learn from that would be useful. There needs to be demonstrables, it currently is too abstract a topic.
The best format might be to start with a presentation rather than what works and what should be done. The conclusion is that if the identifiers issues are laid out and their relevance, then a discussion of their pluses and minuses and how to move foreword, might be useful.
It was decided to do three workshops on Thursday.
Identifiers, data citations are good ideas for proposing for AGU. The deadline is coming up quickly and a determination needs to be made on presentations.
There was a conversation that discussed how to get scientists and journal editors involved in a meeting on citations. A follow up to last year’s town hall would be a good idea; maybe one more focused on journals. It may be worth doing a separate meeting for journals.
Meeting adjourned at 4:20 PM